Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1482 SottaIn Re: Ronald Sotta, 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 -042 Order No. 1482 7/21/08 8/5/08 This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission. Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) 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 were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth 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. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 2 I. ALLEGATIONS: That Ronald Sotta, a public official /public employee in his capacity as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), and 1105(b) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), and 1105(b), when he received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of authority funds for Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority; and when he accepted an increase in compensation prior to the beginning of a new term of office; when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2002, 2003 and 2004 calendar years by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively; and when he failed to disclose on a Statement of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2005 his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising; and when he participated in actions to authorize and approve purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising. II. FINDINGS: 1. Ronald Sotta has served as a member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township (hereafter Authority) since December 3, 1996. a. Sotta was initially appointed to fill a vacant seat on the board and was subsequently re- appointed to full terms in 1998 and 2003. b. Sotta served as Treasurer of the board from at least January 1997 to February 27, 2007. c. Sotta's responsibilities included authority to sign checks issued by the Authority. 2. The Authority is governed by a seven member board of directors. a. The Authority board holds one regularly scheduled meeting per month on the last Tuesday of each month.* 1. Special meetings are held as necessary. *[Cf., Fact Finding 18a]. 3. Authority board members are currently compensated at the rate of $75.00 (gross) per meeting. a. Board members must be present to receive the $75.00 payment. 4. Individuals holding the positions of Board Secretary and Board Treasurer currently receive an extra $35.00 per month in their respective positions. a. From at least April 2002 through June 2007, the Board Secretary received an extra $70.00 per month and the Board Treasurer received an extra $35.00 per month. 5. Voting at Authority meetings is normally conducted via group "aye /nay" vote after a motion is made and properly seconded. a. If any Authority member objects during the group vote, an individual roll call vote is taken and recorded. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 3 b. Any objections or abstentions cast are specifically noted in the minutes. 1. Minutes of Authority board meetings are approved for accuracy at subsequent meetings. 6. Authority board members are provided with a meeting packet the Friday prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. a. The packet is compiled by the Authority's office staff. b. The packet includes the upcoming meeting agenda, the prior month's meeting minutes, the treasurer's report including a monthly bill list, other various reports, correspondence, etc. 1. The bill list represents all expenses paid since the previous meeting. 2. Checks issued to Authority board members are included on the bill list. 7 Signature authority over Authority accounts is maintained by the Authority Board Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary. a. Authority checks require two signatures. b. Facsimile stamps representing the signature of the Chairman and Treasurer previously existed at the Authority office for use by Authority staff. 1. Facsimile stamps are not currently utilized by Authority office staff. 8. The Washington Township Board of Supervisors created the Authority via Ordinance presented at the August 4, 1952, regular supervisors meeting. a. The township supervisors created the Authority pursuant to the authority granted them in the Pennsylvania Municipality Authorities Act. 1. Per the Municipality Authorities Act, compensation provided for Authority board members must be established by the appointing authority. aa. Board members are not permitted to receive an increase or decrease in compensation during their existing terms. 1. Any increase or decrease in salary becomes effective only upon the beginning of a new term after the increase /decrease is enacted. b. The Authority was incorporated with the Pennsylvania Department of State, Corporation Bureau, as a Municipal Authority under Entity Number 381069 on August 21, 1952. 1. The Authority has a registered filing address of 1390 Fayette Ave., Belle Vernon, PA 15012. c. The initial objective of the Authority was to provide water services not only for the majority of [Washington Township] residents but various adjacent communities surrounding Washington Township as well. 1. The Authority primarily serves residential customers but also provides Sotta, 07 -042 Page 4 services to select commercial and industrial accounts. 9. The original Articles of Incorporation associated with the Authority provided for a five member board of directors. a. The original Authority board occasionally discussed both water and sewage services at monthly meetings. 1. Minutes of the June 25, 1962, Authority regular meeting document the Authority's Consulting Engineer, John T. Kane, outlining the proposed sewage system for the township. 2. Each board member was provided with a copy of the sewage system plans for review. 3. Minutes of the June 25, 1962, regular meeting document discussions regarding water and sewage services occurring during the same meeting. b. The original by -laws adopted by the Authority board at the September 8, 1952, meeting established that the board meets once per month to conduct Authority business. c. The by -laws also permitted special meetings to be held if necessary. 10. Over the next several years, the Washington Township Supervisors became involved in reviewing the possibility of instituting a sewage system for the township. a. Washington Township residents utilized individual on -lot systems for sewage purposes at that time. 1. Residents continue to utilize on -lot systems currently. b. The Authority was responsible only for the oversight of water services at that time. 1. The Authority board accomplished its responsibility regarding the oversight of water services via the conduction of one regularly scheduled meeting per month with special meetings held as necessary. 11. In the mid- 1990s, the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) encouraged the township to provide sewage services to township residents. a. Although supportive of a sewage system, DEP was not in favor of the township owning and operating its own sewage treatment plant. b. DEP recommended that the township utilize existing treatment facilities in either Fayette City, Pennsylvania or Belle Vernon, Pennsylvania. 12. The township supervisors at the time were not receptive to DEP's proposal which prompted potential litigation between the township and DEP. a. Negotiations between the township and DEP resulted in the diffusing [sic] of the potential litigation. b. As a result of the negotiations, the township agreed to utilize one of the Sotta, 07 -042 Page 5 existing treatment plants in Fayette City or Belle Vernon. 13. The supervisors subsequently met with representatives from Fayette City, Belle Vernon, and DEP to determine which treatment facility would be utilized. a. The supervisors eventually opted to utilize the Belle Vernon treatment plant for the proposed sewage system. 14. At the July 21, 1998, meeting of the Authority board, the Authority passed a Resolution proposing the submission of amendments to the original Articles of Incorporation to the township supervisors for action thereon. a. The proposed amendments included increasing the number of board members from five to seven and proposed that the purpose of the Authority now include the planning, funding, construction, and operation of sewage facilities throughout the township. 1. The Resolution notes that due to the extensive nature of the planning, constructing, and operating of the system, two additional Authority board members were necessary. 2. The Resolution notes the Authority's desire to plan, construct, and operate the sewage system in Washington Township. 15. Upon submission by the Authority of the resolution to the township supervisors, the supervisors adopted Resolution No. 98 -03 titled, "A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Washington Township, Pennsylvania, Adopting the Amendments to the Articles of Incorporation of the Municipal Authority of the Township of Washington, Fayette County, Pennsylvania," at the July 29, 1998, regular supervisor's meeting. a. The supervisors approved the amendments to the Authority's Articles of Incorporation as documented in the resolution submitted for consideration. 16. In a second undated Resolution, the Authority board voted 4 -0 at its September 29, 1998, regular meeting to approve the Amendments to the Authority's Articles of Incorporation as presented to the township supervisors. a. The Resolution also directed the proper officers of the Authority to take all actions necessary to file the Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation with the proper authorities. b. The Amendment to the Articles of Incorporation was filed with the Pennsylvania Department of State on July 14, 1999. 17. The Authority board held discussions regarding a sewage system for the township at monthly board meetings as early as 1999. a. Initial sewage system discussions were incorporated into regular monthly Authority meetings upon recommendation by representatives from Bankson Engineers. 1. Bankson Engineers representatives recommended that both water and sewage issues be discussed at the same monthly meeting. 2. From at least mid -1999 through February 2000, both water and sewage issues were discussed at the same meeting. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 6 b. During 1999 and 2000 Authority board members received $50.00 (gross) per monthly meeting attended at this time. 1. Each Authority member's check was distributed the night of the advertised meeting. 2. Checks were generated by Authority clerk Laura Snyder under the direction of Office Manager Judith Arrow. 1. Arrow was also an Authority member. 18. Although Bankson Engineers representatives recommended discussing both water and sewage issues at monthly meetings, the Authority board decided to hold separate water and sewage meetings on the same evening. a. From approximately March 2000 through the present, the Authority board has conducted two separate meetings on the published meeting night.* *[Cf., Fact Finding 2a]. 19. There was no formal vote by the Authority board to hold two separate meetings on the same night. a. Public notices published in The Valley Independent, a local newspaper, from 2003 through 2006 for the Authority describe a single Authority meeting to be held on the last Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. 1. The notices provide no information regarding two separate meetings to be held on the same evening. 20. The Authority board made the decision to hold two separate meetings based on the following: a. The separation of financial information, billing information, etc. between water service and sewage service. 1. The separation of information was considered due to the fact that various customers residing outside the township who received water from the Authority would not have the ability to tie into the proposed sewage system. 2. The Authority board did not feel that customers not eligible for sewage service should have to pay for costs associated with the sewage project. b. The belief that as the sewage project progressed, the time necessary to discuss relevant issues would increase significantly. c. The convenience of those in attendance at the meeting. 21. The Authority maintains various bank accounts in relation to its operations. a. The Authority utilized two separate financial institutions regarding its General Fund Account from April 2001 through the present. 1. From approximately April 2001 through approximately January 2005, Sotta, 07 -042 Page 7 the Authority General Fund was maintained at PNC Bank. 2. From February 2005 through the present, the Authority General Fund has been maintained at National City Bank. b. The Authority utilized two separate financial institutions regarding its Sewage Account from April 2001 through the present. 1. During the time period of April 2001 through January 2005, the Authority Sewage Account was maintained at PNC Bank under Account Number xxx>ooc9242. aa. At the August 31, 2000, regular Authority meeting, the Authority board approved the use of $5,000.00 for expenses associated with the sewage project. bb. The $5,000.00 initial deposit credited to the Sewage account originated from the General Account at PNC Bank. 2. From February 2005 through the present, the Authority General Fund has been maintained at National City Bank under Account Number xxx>ooc0183. 22. From approximately March 2000 through March 2001, the Authority board conducted separate meetings for water and sewage issues but received one check as payment for both meetings. a. Although two separate meetings were held on the same evening, the meetings were conducted by the Authority board as a single governing body. 23. In or about April 2001, the Authority board members began receiving two checks: one check for the water meeting and an additional check for the separate sewage meeting. a. Both meetings were held on the same dates and [at the] same location. 1. The second meeting would commence immediately after the first meeting would adjourn. b. No official vote was taken by the Authority board authorizing the issuance of an additional check. 1. The Authority board accepted the additional check without seeking advice from the solicitor or Washington Township, the appointing body. c. The Washington Township Supervisors took no official action to approve payments for separate sewage meetings. 1. The board of supervisors was not aware in April 2001 that the Authority was paying its members for two meetings on the same dates. 24. Payments to board members for attendance at Authority water meetings were issued from the Authority General Fund Account and /or Payroll Account while checks representative of board member attendance at Authority sewage meetings were issued from the Authority Sewage Account. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 8 a. Board members routinely received both checks the night of the advertised meeting. 1. Checks generated for board members not in attendance were to be voided. b. Board members did not question the number or amounts of checks received. 25. Compensation for the Authority board members was increased at the January 2, 2002, re- organization meeting of the Washington Township Supervisors. a. The Washington Township Supervisors approved an increase for Authority board members from fifty dollars ($50.00) per meeting to seventy -five dollars ($75.00) per meeting via unanimous vote. b. No records exist of the Authority being notified by the township of the meeting pay increase. 26. The motion to increase the compensation specifically increased the salaries of "Board Members of [sic] Water and Sewage Authority." a. The motion identified the board members as officials for a single Authority. b. The motion did not include any language authorizing payments for two separate meetings. 27. From April 2002 through June 2007, Sotta routinely received separate checks for his attendance at Authority water and sewage meetings held on the same evening. a. Sotta received $50.00 (gross) for his attendance at each water meeting from April 2002 through December 2003 and $75.00 (gross) for his attendance at each water meeting from January 2004 through June 2007. 1. On January 27, 2004, Sotta received two additional checks (check numbers 2122 and 2128) from the general fund to account for the increase in compensation approved by the supervisors which was not included in water meeting checks issued in 2002 and 2003. aa. No vote or official action was taken by the Authority board authorizing the issuance or receipt of the retroactive payments. bb. No presentation was made by representatives of the Authority to the township supervisors for approval of retroactive payments issued or received. cc. Sotta was not eligible for the increase in compensation until the beginning of his second term in January 2003. 28. Sotta received $50.00 (gross) for his attendance at each sewage meeting from April 2002 through December 2003 and $75.00 (gross) for his attendance at each sewage meeting from January 2004 through June 2007. a. On January 27, 2004, Sotta received two additional checks from the sewage account to account for the increase in compensation approved by the supervisors which was not included in sewage meeting checks issued in Sotta, 07 -042 Page 9 2002 and 2003. 1. No vote was taken by the Authority board authorizing the issuance or receipt of the retroactive payments. 2. No presentation was made by representatives of the Authority to the township supervisors for approval of retroactive payments issued or received. b. Sotta was not eligible to receive sewage [meeting] checks as the Authority board was responsible for both water and sewage issues as a single Authority board. 29. On January 24, 2004, Sotta received and negotiated one check for attendance at Authority water meetings which included the $25.00 per meeting increase in compensation. a. Check Number 2122, issued on January 27, 2004, was issued as retroactive payment for water meetings attended in 2002 to account for the difference in amounts of checks previously issued and the increase approved by the township supervisors respectively. b. Sotta was not eligible for the increase in compensation until the beginning of his second full term in January 2003. 30. Sotta received $300.00 in excess payment as a result of accepting the check issued for attendance at Authority water meetings which included the $25.00 increase in compensation to which he was not entitled. a. Sotta cashed or deposited into his personal bank account all checks received. 31. Sotta participated in actions as an Authority board member in approving the monthly bill list on which the excess payment received for attendance at the water portion of Authority meetings was documented. a. Sotta voted to approve the monthly bill list on which excess payment to Sotta was documented and which [sic] Sotta was not entitled. 32. From April 2002 though June 2007, Sotta received and negotiated sixty -seven checks totaling $5,325.00 (gross) from the Authority's sewage account at either PNC Bank or National City Bank representative of payment for sewage meetings attended on the same night as regular Authority water meetings as shown below: a. Check Numbers 1802 and 1809, both issued on January 27, 2004, were issued as retroactive payments for sewage meetings attended in 2002 and 2003 to account for the difference in amounts of checks previously issued ($50.00) and the increase [to] $75.00 per meeting approved by the township supervisors respectively. 1. Retroactive payments issued were based on the supposition of Sotta attending one sewage meeting each month during 2002 and 2003 (i.e. one meeting per month multiplied by twelve months per year multiplied by [the] $25.00 difference [in meeting pay] equals $300.00). b. Of the sixty -seven checks issued to Sotta representative of attendance at sewage meetings, Sotta's signature appears as an authorized Authority Sotta, 07 -042 Page 10 signatory on at least eight checks totaling $425.00. c. Sotta either cashed or deposited all checks received and utilized the funds for various personal use[s]. 33. Sotta participated in actions as an Authority board member in approving monthly bill lists on which payment received for attendance at the sewage portion of Authority meetings was documented. a. Sotta voted to approve fifty -nine of fifty -nine bill lists on which payment to him was noted for attendance at sewage portions of Authority meetings. 34. Sotta was erroneously not issued payment for his attendance at the October 26, 2004, regular Authority meeting. a. Compensation due Sotta for attendance at the meeting totals approximately $75.00. 35. Sotta is no longer receiving separate checks representative of payment for attendance at Authority water and sewage meetings held on the same evening. a. In July 2007, the Authority board elected to stop the receipt of separate checks for water and sewage meetings held on the same evening based on the advice of the Authority's newly appointed solicitor. b. The decision to cease the separate meeting payment was not formally voted on by the Authority board. 1. The decision was based on informal discussions held with the newly appointed solicitor. 36. Sotta, as a member of the Authority board, realized a financial gain of approximately $5,550.00 as a result of approving bill lists documenting payment to himself for attendance at sewage portions of Authority meetings, signing checks issued to himself as an authorized Authority signatory, and accepting payment for attendance at water and sewage portions of regularly scheduled Authority meetings as shown below: Payment for attendance at sewage portions of Authority meetings: $5,325.00 Retroactive payment representative of increase for 2002 water meetings: $30000 Credit for payment not received for attendance at Authority meetings: Total: THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO SOTTA'S PARTICIPATION IN ACTIONS TO AUTHORIZE AND APPROVE PURCHASES BY THE AUTHORITY FROM ATLAS MERCHANDISING COMPANY, A BUSINESS WITH WHICH SOTTA WAS ASSOCIATED. 37. The Authority utilizes various supplies during the course of everyday operation. a. Supplies utilized include paper towels, cleaning agents, batteries, etc. 38. Vendors utilized to provide the Authority with supplies are not consistently discussed or approved by the board prior to being selected. a. The approval of vendors utilized occurs after the fact at the regular Authority meetings when checks are signed to issue payment to the vendors. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 11 b. Office staff and the plant manager are responsible for selecting vendors to provide the Authority with supplies considered day -to -day necessities. 39. Sotta was 47% owner of Atlas Merchandising Company (hereafter Atlas), located at 138 -142 McKean Avenue, Charleroi, Pennsylvania. a. Sotta's business partner was Rose Kiski. 1. Kiski owned the remaining 53% interest [in] Atlas. 40. Atlas was incorporated as a business within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania on October 3, 1980, under Entity Number 721417. a. Atlas was an established business within the community prior to being incorporated. 1. Sotta began working for the business in the mid- 1950s. b. Atlas was in the process of going out of business as of January 2008. 41. Department of State Corporation Bureau records document corporate officers for Atlas as follows: a. President: Rose Kiski. b. Vice - President: Ron Suttaa. 1. Sotta's name is incorrectly documented with the Corporation Bureau. c. Secretary: Larry Walters. 42. Atlas specialized in selling tobacco products, candy, janitorial supplies, and jewelry at wholesale prices. a. Atlas also provides various items such as gloves, batteries, etc. 43. The Authority has made purchases from Atlas since at least 1982. a. The Authority has had a business relationship with Atlas [since] prior to Sotta becoming an Authority board member. b. The Authority continued its business relationship with Atlas during Sotta's tenure as board member /treasurer. 44. From March 2002 through November 2006, the Authority, through the office staff and /or the plant manager, selected Atlas to provide the Authority with various supplies. a. From March 2002 through July 2006, the Authority purchased $2,192.96 worth of products from Atlas. b. No single purchase exceeded the $500.00 threshold to require a public bid. c. Most purchases were initiated by staff through telephonic contacts with Atlas. 1. Sotta was not contacted for the bulk of purchases made. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 12 45. For over twenty years, supplies have consistently been ordered from Atlas by the office staff and /or the plant manager without seeking comparative prices or board approval a. Comparative prices were not solicited due to the fact that: 1. Atlas was the closest wholesaler in the immediate area. 2. Supplies ordered were delivered directly to the Authority. 3. Items sold were at discounted /wholesale prices. b. The Office Manager and Plant Manager had the authority to order necessary supplies without board approval. 46. Sotta routinely participated in voting to approve monthly bill lists which included payment to Atlas. a. Of the $2,192.96 worth of Atlas products ordered, the Authority paid only $2,185.86. b. Atlas did not seek payment of the $7.10 due. c. Sotta voted affirmatively to approve monthly bills twenty of the twenty times [sic] which included payment to Atlas. 1. Sotta is not documented in meeting minutes as abstaining from voting to approve monthly bills which documented payment to Atlas. d. Sotta signed at least two of the twenty checks issued to Atlas, as an authorized Authority signatory, totaling $125.10. 47. Atlas normally operated at a 20% profit margin regarding supply products sold. a. Sotta routinely provided the Authority at least a 10% discount on supplies purchased. 48. Atlas realized a profit of approximately $218.64 as a result of selling merchandise to the Authority between March 2002 and July 2006. 49. Sotta, and /or Atlas, a business with which he is associated, realized a private pecuniary gain of approximately $218.64 as a result of selling supplies to the Authority and [Sotta's] subsequently voting to approve bill lists [which included] payment to Atlas Merchandising Company. 50. During an interview with Commission investigators on January 16, 2008, Sotta stated the following: a. The Authority has been holding separate water and sewage meetings on the same evening dating back to approximately February 2000. b. The Authority board members began receiving two checks for water and sewage meetings held on the same evening since [sic] approximately 2001. c. The board members accepted both checks as presented to them by the board secretary, Judith Arrow. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 13 1. No board members questioned Arrow regarding why an additional check began being issued at monthly meetings. 2. Sotta assumed that the Washington Township Supervisors had approved the additional payment for separate sewage meetings held. d. Sotta either cashed or deposited all of the checks he received regarding payment for sewage meetings attended. e. Sotta verified that he has been part owner of Atlas Merchandising since approximately 1984. 1. Atlas Merchandising has been supplying the Authority with products [since] prior to his service on the Authority board. f. Sotta acknowledged selling Atlas Merchandising products to the Authority. 1. Sotta reported that he provided the Authority with at least a 10% discount on supplies purchased. 2. Sotta was under the impression that due to the limited profit he was receiving from the Authority, there was not a problem with selling to the Authority. Sotta denied ever advocating for the use of his business by the Authority. 1. Sotta stated that he was initially contacted by [the] Authority to supply products. h. When Sotta was notified that there were potential problems with him selling to the Authority, Sotta stopped selling to the Authority and informed Authority staff to order products from another vendor. 51. Sotta, as an Authority board member, realized a total financial gain of approximately $5,768.64 as a result of participating in actions of the Authority board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for board members' compensation in excess of that approved by the Washington Township Supervisors, when he accepted an increase in compensation prior to the beginning of a new term of office, and when he participated in actions to approve purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising Company, a business with which he was associated, as shown below: g. Payment for attendance at sewage portions of Authority meetings: $00 Retroactive payment representative of increase for 2002 water meetings: $300.00 Credit for payment not received for attendance at Authority meetings: -75.00 Profit realized by Sotta /Atlas via purchases made by the Authority from Atlas: $218.64 Total: $5768.64 THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT SOTTA FAILED TO FILE STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2002, 2003, AND 2004 AND THAT SOTTA FAILED TO DISCLOSE HIS OFFICE, DIRECTORSHIP, OR EMPLOYMENT IN ATLAS MERCHANDISING COMPANY ON HIS 2005 CALENDAR YEAR STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS. 52. Statement of Financial Interests filing requirements for public officials and public employees are mandated by Section 1104 of the State Ethics Act. 2002 2003 2004 2005 None None None 01/28/06 Sotta, 07 -042 Page 14 a. Sotta was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1St annually in his position as an Authority board member. 53. A review of /request for records on March 23, 2007, at the Authority office revealed the following Statements of Financial Interests on file for Sotta for calendar years 2002 through 2005: 54. Sotta failed to disclose his office, directorship, or employment and his financial interest in any legal entity in business for profit relating to his association with Atlas Merchandising Company on his 2005 calendar year Statement of Financial Interests filed on January 28, 2006. a. Sotta documented "none" on each section of his Statement of Financial Interest noted above. 1. Sotta was one of two partners associated with Atlas during the 2005 calendar year. b. Sotta did not document any information under the real estate interests, creditors, and gifts sections of his 2005 calendar year Statement of Financial Interests. 55. Sotta was issued a Notice of Investigation letter from the Harrisburg Office of the State Ethics Commission dated May 1, 2007. a. Included in the allegations levied against Sotta was Sotta's failure to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2005. b. Additionally included in the allegations was Sotta's failure to disclose his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising Company. 56. Sotta submitted correspondence to the State Ethics Commission Harrisburg office dated May 22, 2007, to the direction of John J. Contino (Executive Director) apologizing for omitted information previously submitted. a. Accompanying the correspondence were completed copies of Statements of Financial Interests for Sotta for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004. 1. All Statements of Financial Interests received were dated May 22, 2007. 57. On May 14, 2008, Sotta submitted an amended Statement of Financial Interests form for calendar year 2005 documenting his association with Atlas Merchandising Company. III. DISCUSSION: As a Member of the Board of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township from December 3, 1996, to the present, Respondent Ronald Sotta (also referred to herein as "Respondent," "Respondent Sotta," or "Sotta ") has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 15 The allegations are that Sotta violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), and 1105(b) of the Ethics Act when he received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of authority funds for Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority and when he accepted an increase in compensation prior to the beginning of a new term of office; when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2002, 2003, and 2004 calendar years by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively; when he failed to disclose on his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2005 his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising; and when he participated in actions to authorize and approve purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising. 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. "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. 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 Sotta, 07 -042 Page 16 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. Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act provides that no public official shall be allowed to take the oath of office, enter or continue upon his duties, or receive compensation from public funds unless he has filed a Statement of Financial Interests as required by the Ethics Act. Section 1105(b)(8) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the Statement of Financial Interests any office, directorship or employment in any business entity. Section 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the Statement of Financial Interests any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. The term "financial interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as "[a]ny financial interest in a legal entity engaged in business for profit which comprises more than 5% of the equity of the business or more than 5% of the assets of the economic interest in indebtedness." 65 Pa. C. S. § 1102. As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein. The Washington Township Board of Supervisors ( "Board of Supervisors ") created the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority ") in 1952, pursuant to the authority granted by the Pennsylvania Municipality Authorities Act. The original by -laws adopted by the Authority Board in 1952 established that the Authority Board would meet once per month to conduct Authority business. The by -laws also permitted special meetings to be held if necessary. The initial objective of the Authority was to provide water services for the majority of residents of Washington Township ( "Township "), as well as residents of various adjacent communities. However, in 1999, with the approval of the Board of Supervisors, the Authority's Articles of Incorporation were amended to include as a purpose of the Authority the planning, funding, construction, and operation of sewage facilities throughout the Township. Respondent Sotta has served as a Member of the Authority Board since December 3, 1996. From at least January 1997 to February 27, 2007, Sotta served as Treasurer of the Authority Board. From at least mid -1999 through February 2000, the Authority Board followed the recommendations of an engineering firm to discuss water and sewage issues at the same monthly meetings. At that time, Authority Board Members received $50.00 (gross) per monthly meeting attended. However, subsequently, and without a formal vote, the Authority Board decided to hold separate water and sewage meetings on the same evenings. From approximately March 2000 through the present, the Authority Board has conducted two separate meetings on published meeting nights. Such meetings have been held consecutively and at the same location. From approximately March 2000 through March 2001, Board Members attending Authority Board meetings continued to receive one check per meeting night, which was for both meetings. However, in or about April 2001, Sotta, 07 -042 Page 17 Sotta and other Authority Board Members began receiving two checks per meeting night, with one check being for the water meeting and an additional check being for the sewage meeting. Per the Municipality Authorities Act, compensation provided for authority board members must be established by the appointing authority (in this case, the Board of Supervisors). 53 Pa.C.S. § 5610(d). Authority board members are not permitted to receive an increase or decrease in compensation during their existing terms. Id. Any increase or decrease in salary becomes effective only upon the beginning of a new term after the increase /decrease is enacted. Id. The Board of Supervisors took no official action to approve payments to Authority Board Members for separate water and sewage meetings. In April 2001, the Board of Supervisors was not aware that the Authority was paying its Board Members for two meetings on the same dates. At the January 2, 2002, re- organization meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the compensation for Authority Board Members was increased from fifty dollars per meeting to seventy -five dollars per meeting. The motion to increase the compensation identified the Board Members as officials for a single Authority. The motion did not include any language authorizing payments for two separate meetings. No records exist of the Authority being notified by the Township at that time of the meeting pay increase. From April 2002 through June 2007, Sotta routinely received separate checks for his attendance at Authority Board water and sewage meetings held on the same evening. Sotta received $50.00 (gross) for his attendance at each water meeting from April 2002 through December 2003 and $75.00 (gross) for his attendance at each water meeting from January 2004 through June 2007. On January 27, 2004, Sotta received two additional checks to account for the increase in compensation approved by the Board of Supervisors that was not included in water meeting checks issued in 2002 and 2003. However, Sotta was not eligible to receive the increase in compensation until the beginning of his second full term in January 2003. Sotta received $300.00 in excess payment as a result of accepting the check issued as retroactive payment for the $25.00 increase in compensation to which he was not entitled for his attendance at Authority water meetings in 2002. Sotta participated in actions as an Authority Board Member in approving the monthly bill list that included the aforesaid check. Sotta received $50.00 (gross) for his attendance at each sewage meeting from April 2002 through December 2003 and $75.00 (gross) for his attendance at each sewage meeting from January 2004 through June 2007. On January 27, 2004, Sotta also received two additional checks to account for the increase in compensation approved by the Board of Supervisors that was not included in sewage meeting checks issued in 2002 and 2003. However, Sotta was not eligible to receive sewage meeting checks at all, because the Authority Board was responsible for both water and sewage issues as a single Authority Board. Per Fact Finding 32, from April 2002 though June 2007, Sotta received and negotiated sixty -seven Authority checks totaling $5,325.00 (gross) representing payment for sewage meetings attended on the same night as regular Authority water meetings. Signature authority over Authority accounts is maintained by the Authority Board Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary. Authority checks require two signatures. Of the aforesaid sixty -seven checks, Sotta's signature appears as an authorized Authority signatory on at least eight checks totaling $425.00. Sotta also participated in actions of Sotta, 07 -042 Page 18 the Authority Board in approving fifty -nine monthly bill lists that included checks for payment for his attendance at Authority sewage meetings. Sotta was erroneously not issued payment for his attendance at the Authority Board meeting held on October 26, 2004. Compensation due Sotta for attendance at that meeting would total approximately $75.00. Sotta cashed or deposited all of the Authority checks he received, and he utilized the funds for various personal uses. In July 2007, the Authority Board elected to stop issuing separate checks for water and sewage meetings held on the same evening, based on the advice of the Authority's newly appointed solicitor. The parties have stipulated that Sotta realized a financial gain of approximately $5,500.00, consisting of the following: (1) $5,325.00 in payments for attendance at Authority sewage meetings when the Board of Supervisors had not authorized compensation for separate water and sewage meetings; and (2) $300.00 in retroactive payment representative of the $25.00 increase in compensation for attendance at Authority water meetings in 2002, less a $75.00 credit for a payment Sotta should have received, but did not receive, for attending an Authority water meeting. We shall now review the stipulated Fact Findings relating to allegations that Sotta participated in actions to authorize and approve purchases by the Authority from "Atlas Merchandising." In the mid- 1950s, Sotta began working for a business named "Atlas Merchandising Company" (hereinafter referred to as "Atlas" or "Atlas Merchandising "), located in Charleroi, Pennsylvania. Atlas is a wholesale supplier of products including, inter alia, janitorial supplies and batteries. On October 3, 1980, Atlas was registered as a corporation in Pennsylvania. Since approximately 1984, Sotta has been a part owner of Atlas. Sotta owns a forty -seven percent (47 %) interest in Atlas while his partner, Rose Kiski, owns the remaining fifty -three percent (53 %) interest in Atlas. Sotta is listed as the Vice - President of Atlas in records of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of State. The Authority utilizes various supplies, including paper towels, cleaning agents and batteries, during the course of its everyday operation. The Authority Board does not consistently discuss or pre- approve the selection of vendors utilized to provide supplies to the Authority. Instead, office staff and the plant manager are responsible for selecting vendors to provide the Authority with supplies considered to be day -to -day necessities. The Authority Board subsequently approves the utilization of the selected vendors at the regular Authority meetings when checks are signed to issue payment to such vendors. The Authority has had a business relationship with Atlas since at least 1982. For over twenty years, supplies have consistently been ordered from Atlas by the office staff and /or the plant manager without seeking comparative prices or Authority Board approval. From March 2002 through July 2006, the Authority, through the office staff and /or the plant manager, selected Atlas to provide the Authority with various supplies worth $2,192.96. Most purchases were initiated by staff through telephonic contacts with Atlas. No single purchase exceeded $500.00, and Sotta was not contacted for the bulk of purchases made. Sotta voted to approve twenty monthly bill lists that included payments to Atlas for the aforesaid purchases. In addition, Sotta's signature appears as an authorized Authority signatory on at least two checks issued to Atlas totaling $125.10. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 19 The parties have stipulated that Sotta and /or Atlas realized a private pecuniary gain consisting of profit of approximately $218.64 as a result of the sale of supplies to the Authority between March 2002 and July 2006. In a statement provided to Commission investigators on January 16, 2008, Sotta stated, inter alia, the following: the Authority Board has been holding separate water and sewage meetings on the same evening dating back to approximately February 2000; the Authority Board Members began receiving two checks for water and sewage meetings held on the same evening in approximately 2001; Sotta assumed that the Board of Supervisors had approved additional payment for separate sewage meetings held; Sotta was under the impression that there was no problem with selling Atlas Merchandising products to the Authority due to the limited profit he was receiving; and when Sotta was notified that there were potential problems with him selling supplies to the Authority, he stopped selling to the Authority and informed Authority staff to order products from another vendor. Turning to the Fact Findings pertaining to Sotta's Statements of Financial Interests, the parties have stipulated that Sotta was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1 annually in his position as an Authority Board Member. Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004 with the Authority by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively, as set forth in Fact Finding 53. Although Sotta filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2005 with the Authority on January 28, 2006, he failed to disclose on the Statement of Financial Interests his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising. 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 an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a) occurred when Sotta, as a Board Member of the Washington Township Municipal Authority, he [sic] received compensation not provided for by the law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of authority funds for Board Members compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority; b. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a) occurred when he accepted an increase in compensation prior to the beginning of a new term of office; c. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a) occurred when Sotta authorized and approved purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising, a company with which he is associated; Sotta, 07 -042 Page 20 d. That a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104 occurred when Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2002, 2003 and 2004 calendar years by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004 and May 1, 2005 respectively; and e. That an unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b) occurred in relation to Sotta's failure to disclose his office, directorship or employment in Atlas Merchandising, and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising, on a Statement of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2005. 4. Sotta agrees to make payment in the amount of $4,000.00 in settlement of this matter payable to the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within thirty (30) days of 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 2. In considering the Consent Agreement, we accept the parties' recommendation that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority. From April 2002 through June 2007, Sotta received and negotiated sixty -seven Authority checks totaling $5,325.00 (gross) representing payment for sewage meetings attended on the same night as regular Authority water meetings. Sotta used the authority of his public office as an Authority Board Member when he participated in actions of the Authority Board in approving fifty -nine monthly bill lists that included checks for payment for his attendance at Authority sewage meetings. See, Cours, Order 1150; Hoover, Order 1402; Nagele, Order 1403; Harton, Order 1421. The payments Sotta received for sewage meetings constituted a private pecuniary benefit to Sotta, specifically, unauthorized compensation. Per the Municipality Authorities Act, compensation provided for authority board members must be established by the appointing authority (in this case, the Board of Supervisors). 53 Pa.C.S. § 5610(d). The Board of Supervisors took no official action to approve payments to Authority Board Members for separate water and sewage meetings. Through the Consent Agreement, the parties have agreed that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for Board Members' compensation in excess of that Sotta, 07 -042 Page 21 approved by the Board of Supervisors. Intent is not a requisite element of a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, see, Yocabet v. State Ethics Commission, 531 A.2d 536 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987). Nonetheless, we accept the Consent Agreement and hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta, as an Authority Board Member, received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for Authority Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the Board of Supervisors. We shall next consider the recommendation of the parties that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta accepted an increase in compensation prior to the beginning of a new term of office. As noted above, at the January 2, 2002, re- organization meeting of the Board of Supervisors, the compensation for Authority Board Members was increased from fifty dollars ($50.00) per meeting to seventy -five dollars ($75.00) per meeting. However, per the Municipality Authorities Act, authority board members are not permitted to receive an increase or decrease in compensation during their existing terms. 53 Pa.C.S. § 5610(d). Any increase or decrease in salary becomes effective only upon the beginning of a new term after the increase /decrease is enacted. Id. Sotta was not eligible to receive the increase in compensation until the beginning of his second full term in January 2003. Sotta received $300.00 in excess payment as a result of accepting the check issued as retroactive payment for the $25.00 increase in compensation to which he was not entitled for attendance at Authority water meetings in 2002. Such excess compensation was not authorized in law and constituted a private pecuniary benefit to Sotta. The element of a use of authority of office has been established. Sotta used the authority of his public office when he participated in actions as an Authority Board Member in approving the monthly bill list that included the aforesaid check. We are mindful of the judicial decision in Bixler v. State Ethics Commission, 847 A.2d 785 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (holding that a net profit in the amount of $561.77 resulting from business transactions between a township supervisor's employer and the township would fall within the "de minimis" exclusion to the definition of "conflict of interest "). If the parties had not determined to enter into a Consent Agreement, we might have been presented with factual and legal issues as to whether, under the circumstances of this case, Bixler would apply as to the excess payment Sotta received as a result of accepting the check issued as retroactive payment for the increase in compensation to which he was not entitled for attendance at Authority water meetings in 2002. However, given: (1) that the parties have entered into a comprehensive Consent Agreement; and (2) the parties are in agreement that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) as to the aforesaid payment would be appropriate as part of an overall settlement of this case, we shall accept the parties' proposed disposition. We note that this determination in this case based upon the agreement of the parties should not be considered as precedent for other cases, which would be determined based upon their own facts and circumstances. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, we hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta accepted an increase in compensation (meeting pay) prior to the beginning of a new term of office. See, Trimer, Order 1285. Likewise, we shall accept the third recommended violation submitted by the parties, specifically, that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta authorized and approved purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 22 From March 2002 through July 2006, the Authority, through the office staff and /or the plant manager, selected Atlas to provide the Authority with various supplies worth $2,192.96. Sotta used the authority of his public office as an Authority Board Member when he voted to approve twenty monthly bill lists that included payments to Atlas for the aforesaid purchases and signed as an authorized Authority signatory at least two checks issued to Atlas. The parties have stipulated that Sotta and /or Atlas realized a private pecuniary gain consisting of profit of approximately $218.64 as a result of the aforesaid sale of supplies to the Authority between March 2002 and July 2006. Sotta has a 47% ownership interest in Atlas and is the Vice President of Atlas. We note that if the parties had not determined to enter into a Consent Agreement, we might have been presented with factual and legal issues as to whether, under the circumstances of this case, Bixler, supra, would apply as to the aforesaid $218.64 private pecuniary gain. However, given: (1) that the parties have entered into a comprehensive Consent Agreement; and (2) the parties are in agreement that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) as to the aforesaid private pecuniary benefit would be appropriate as part of an overall settlement of this case, we shall accept the parties' proposed disposition. We note that this determination in this case based upon the agreement of the parties should not be considered as precedent for other cases, which would be determined based upon their own facts and circumstances. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, we hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta authorized and approved purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising, a business with which he is associated. Finally, we shall consider the parties' recommendations as to a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act with respect to Sotta's failure to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004, and an unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act with respect to Sotta's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2005. As a Member of the Authority Board, Sotta is a public official subject to the Ethics Act and in particular, the requirement to file Statements of Financial Interests. Per the stipulated Findings, Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with the Authority for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004 by the filing deadlines of May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively. The parties have stipulated that Sotta's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2005 failed to disclose his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas and his financial interest in Atlas. In May 2007, Sotta filed with this Commission Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004. See, Fact Finding 56. In May 2008, Sotta submitted an amended Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2005 that disclosed his association with Atlas. See, Fact Finding 57. Accordingly, we hold that a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004 by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively. We further hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Sotta's failure to disclose his office, directorship or employment in Atlas Merchandising, and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising, on his Statement of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2005. Based upon the stipulated findings, it was necessary for the aforesaid information to be disclosed pursuant to Sections 1105(b)(8) and (9) of the Ethics Act, but there is no indication that Sotta's failure to do so was intentional. Sotta, 07 -042 Page 23 As for Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act, it appears that the Investigative Division in the exercise of its prosecutorial discretion has elected to non pros that particular portion of the allegations. As part of the Consent Agreement, Sotta has agreed to make payment in the amount of $4,000 payable to the Authority and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 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, Sotta is directed to make payment in the amount of $4,000 payable to the Authority and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of 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. As a Member of the Board of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority ") from December 3, 1996, to the present, Respondent Ronald Sotta ( "Sotta ") has been 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. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta, as an Authority Board Member, received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for Authority Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority (Washington Township Board of Supervisors). 3. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta accepted an increase in compensation (meeting pay) prior to the beginning of a new term of office. 4. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta authorized and approved purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising, a business with which he is associated. 5. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004 by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively. 6. An unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Sotta's failure to disclose his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising on his Statement of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2005. In Re: Ronald Sotta, Respondent ORDER NO. 1482 File Docket: 07 -042 Date Decided: 7/21/08 Date Mailed: 8/5/08 1 An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Ronald Sotta ( "Sotta "), as a Member of the Board of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority "), received compensation not provided for by law by participating in actions of the Authority Board to authorize the expenditure of Authority funds for Authority Board Members' compensation in excess of that approved by the appointing authority (Washington Township Board of Supervisors). 2. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta accepted an increase in compensation (meeting pay) prior to the beginning of a new term of office. 3. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta authorized and approved purchases by the Authority from Atlas Merchandising, a business with which he is associated. 4. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Sotta failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2002, 2003, and 2004 by May 1, 2003, May 1, 2004, and May 1, 2005, respectively. 5. An unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Sotta's failure to disclose his office, directorship, or employment in Atlas Merchandising and his financial interest in Atlas Merchandising on his Statement of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2005. 6. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Sotta is directed to make payment in the amount of $4,000 payable n o the Authority and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this Order. 7 Compliance with Paragraph 6 of this Order will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. a. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Louis W. Fryman, Chair