Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1489 KeohaneIn Re: Robert Keohane, 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 -062 Order No. 1489 9/22/08 10/10/08 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." A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing 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. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 2 I. ALLEGATIONS: That Robert Keohane, a public official /public employee in his capacity as a Member of Council of Laflin Borough, Luzerne County, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1103(f) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. § §1103(a) and 1103(f), when he used the authority of his office for the private pecuniary gain of himself and /or a business with which he is associated by participating in actions of council to make purchases of cleaning supplies from his employer Philip Rosenau, Inc.; when the purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau without an open and public process; and when he participated in the process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. II. FINDINGS: 1. Robert Keohane served as a Borough Council Member for Laflin Borough, Luzerne County from approximately 2000 through 2008. a. Keohane resigned on January 7, 2008. b. Keohane served as the Borough Council President from 2002 through 2007. 2. Laflin Borough is governed by a seven member Council. a. Council meets once per month. 3. Council is provided a listing of monthly bills to be approved for payment at the monthly meeting. a. The bill list includes pre- approved bills, which are bills that are paid routinely on a monthly basis. 1. These bills include utility and phone bills. 4. Borough issued checks for the payment of invoices are signed by the President or Vice - President of Council and the Secretary /Treasurer. 5. Robert Keohane is employed as a sales representative for Philip Rosenau, Inc. a. Philip Rosenau is a distributor of janitorial maintenance supplies and equipment. 1. Philip Rosenau's area of distribution includes Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and the District of Columbia. 2. Philip Rosenau is headquartered in Warminster, PA. b. Keohane has worked for Philip Rosenau for twenty years. c. Keohane is the sales representative for the Scranton, Wilkes- Barre, Allentown, and Pocono areas. d. Keohane is paid a salary from Philip Rosenau. e. Keohane receives commission on all products that he sells. f. The company went to a commission system of payment in approximately Keohane, 07 -062 Page 3 6. As the President of Council, Keohane was responsible for leading Borough meetings on a monthly basis in addition to: a. Signing all Borough checks issued to pay vendors. b. Approving bills, along with other Council members. 7 The trash collection for Borough residents is contracted by Laflin Borough. a. J.P. Mascaro has had the garbage and recycling collection contract since at least February 1, 2007. 8. In January 1982, Laflin Borough adopted Ordinance 2 of 1982 relating to sanitation and the promotion of public health and safety; providing for the establishment of a municipal collection and disposal service for all non - commercial or non - industrial garbage and rubbish accumulated in the Borough of Laflin; making regulations for the collection and disposal of all such garbage and rubbish and for the maintenance of sanitary conditions on public and private premises within the Borough and authorizing the Council to make additional Regulations relating thereto; providing for the imposition and collection by the Borough of fees for the collection and disposal of such garbage and rubbish and providing penalties for violation of [such] Ordinance and such Regulations; and repealing Ordinances and parts of Ordinances inconsistent [therewith]. a. b. c. 2003 or 2004. Garbage was required to be collected in plastic bags or containers that conform to the provisions of the Ordinance. Residents are permitted to put out five (5) bags weekly or additional fees will be charged. Residents are charged a $25.00 annual fee for garbage collection. 9. The Borough had used a window sticker system prior to the current bag system for garbage collection. a. The window sticker method was used at least on one occasion during the use of the bag system. b. Residents were required to purchase a sticker to place in their window. 1. The sticker would indicate how many bags of garbage the resident needed to have picked up. 2. Residents were charged per sticker. c. The sticker system was discontinued due to Council's concerns that some residents were forging the window stickers to avoid paying the cost of the stickers. 10. In or about January 1991, Council adopted a system requiring residents to utilize plastic bags, in addition to paying the annual trash collection fee. a. The Borough had blue bags with Laflin Borough printed on them for residential use. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 4 b. Residents were able to purchase the bags from either the Borough or Sunshine Market. c. The Borough contracted with Allied Services to provide the trash bags. 11. Allied Services is a company located in Scranton, PA, that employs people with disabilities. a. Allied Services' mission is dedicated to improving and expanding services to people with disabilities. b. Allied Services provides vocational training opportunities to individuals in the community. c. The company is a diverse not - for - profit provider of rehabilitative, vocational, home care and residential services. 12. Allied Services was utilized by Laflin Borough from July 1997 to March 2003 to provide trash /garbage bags to be used by Borough residents. a. The Borough resumed using Allied as the supplier of garbage bags for Laflin Borough in the fall of 2007. 13. Allied's costs to supply the garbage bags to the Borough increased significantly in or around 2003. a. Costs for materials Allied used had increased. b. Due to the increase, the Borough Secretary independently sought quotes for other suppliers of the garbage bags. 1. The cost of the bags for residents had increased by December 24, 2003. 2. As of September 22, 2005, residents were also required to pay a $50.00 annual fee to defray the cost of garbage removal. 14. Laflin Borough Secretary, Lorraine Healey, requested quotes from Philip Rosenau Co. and Allied Services in the summer of 2004. a. In or about July of 2004, Allied Services provided Laflin Borough with a quote of $12.23 per case of 100 trash bags. b. In or about August 2004, Philip Rosenau Co., Inc., represented by Robert Keohane, quoted Laflin Borough a price of $11.98 per case of 100 trash bags. 15. Due to Rosenau's lower price quote, Healey made the decision to contract with Rosenau. a. There was no vote of Council to authorize Healey to either obtain quotes or enter into a contract with Rosenau. b. No record exists of Healey discussing the quotes with Keohane or obtaining his approval. Invoice Date Invoice No. Sales Rep P.O. # Description Total Notes from Invoices 8/4/2003 564718 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 5 Items, Mats $ 579.65 9/3/2003 568629 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 120 Cases, Trash bags $ 1,437.60 12/9/2003 581730 Bob Keohane 235678 120 Cases, Trash bags $ 1,437.60 8/5/2004 612710 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 129 Cases, Trash Bags $ 1,545.42 8/18/2004 614395 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 7 Items, Floor Machine and Cleaner $ 1,020.05 12/20/2004 12152 Bob Keohane 77014 130 Cases, Trash Bags $ 1,557.40 4/26/2005 32519 Bob Keohane 134 Cases, Trash Bags $ 2,141.32 10/3/2005 56199 Bob Keohane 120 Cases, Trash bags $ 1,917.60 3/14/2006 80683 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 133 Cases, Trash Bags $ 2,327.50 10/10/2006 112066 Bob Keohane 130 Cases, Trash Bags $ 2,354.30 Keohane, 07 -062 Page 5 16. Healey contacted Keohane to provide a quote because of her knowledge of the type of products Rosenau sold. a. Rosenau sold products to the Borough prior to 2003. b. Keohane did not solicit Healey to provide a quote. c. Healey made the decision to utilize Rosenau based on the lower quote. 17. On March 1, 2005, Borough Secretary Healey sent a letter to Allied Services requesting a quote to provide trash bags for 2005. a. Allied did not provide a quote as requested. b. Based on the lack of quote from Allied, the Borough continued to utilize Rosenau. c. No record exists of quotes being sought by the Borough for 2006. 18. Philip Rosenau previously supplied cleaning supplies to Laflin Borough from March 29, 1995, through April 25, 1996, and from March 13, 2000, through May 2, 2007. a. Keohane provided quotes for supplies to the Borough as requested by the Borough Secretary. 1. The Borough purchased from Rosenau prior to Keohane's service on Council. b. Keohane was the sole Philip Rosenau Sales Representative that had any contact with Laflin Borough. c. Cleaning supplies provided were generally purchases of less than $100.00 per purchase. d. Philip Rosenau supplied the Borough, prior to 2003, with cleaning supplies and garbage bags. 19. The following chart identifies the invoices from Philip Rosenau, Inc. to Laflin Borough for purchases of garbage bags and cleaning supplies in excess of $500.00 from 2003 through 2007. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 6 5/2/2007 161192 Bob Keohane 133 Cases, Trash Bags $ 2,227.53 1/17/2007 136440 Bob Keohane Verbal Lorraine 135 Cases, Trash Bags $ 2,444.85 20. Keohane voted to approve payment of forty -one (41) of the fifty -eight (58) invoices to Philip Rosenau between January 7, 2002, and May 14, 2007. a. The Rosenau invoices were included as part of monthly bill lists submitted to Council for approval. b. Keohane voted to approve entire bill lists. c. Keohane abstained on eleven (11) occasions between January 2002 and May 14, 2007, and was absent on four (4) other occasions. 21. Keohane signed twenty -one (21) of the thirty -three (33) checks issued to Philip Rosenau since April 2000. a. Keohane signed seventeen (17) of the twenty -eight (28) checks issued to Rosenau after the Borough switched from Allied for trash bag services. 22. Keohane is listed as the sales agent on all invoices for Laflin Borough that were provided by Philip Rosenau Co. a. Keohane admitted to an Investigator for the State Ethics Commission that he was the only Philip Rosenau representative that sold to Laflin Borough. 23. From March 2002 through May 2007, Keohane earned a total of $1,633.46 in commissions regarding all sales to Laflin Borough. 24. Keohane regularly made donations to the Borough to provide assistance for certain publicly provided services. a. Keohane made general donations to the Borough and specifically to the Laflin Borough Library and Fire Department. b. Keohane made donations to the Borough of at least $385.00 between August 15, 2005, and September 25, 2007. c. Keohane exhibited a history of making donations to the Borough, and continued to do so after being informed of the State Ethics Commission investigation, as a sign of good faith and that he had the best interest of the Borough in mind. 25. In or around 2007, residents of Laflin Borough raised the issue of Keohane supplying garbage bags to the Borough. a. Some Borough citizens were critical of decisions being made by Council, including Keohane supplying trash bags to the Borough. b. However, as the State Ethics Commission's investigation revealed, Keohane did not use the authority of his office in either choosing Philip Rosenau, Inc. as a supplier and /or contracting with same. c. The decision to utilize Philip Rosenau, Inc. and the solicitation of bids from same, was the sole action of the Borough Secretary, Lorraine Healey. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 7 26. As a result of the citizen complaints, Keohane decided to no longer supply the bags to the Borough. a. Keohane had also been notified by July 16, 2007, of the State Ethics Commission investigation. 27. Laflin Borough resumed using Allied Services in August 2007 as a result of Rosenau declining to contract with the Borough. a. Allied was able to locate a supplier to provide trash bags at a cost lower than previous quotes. b. Since August 2007, Laflin Borough has used the services of Allied exclusively. 28. Robert Keohane's use of the authority of his public position, as a Laflin Borough Council Member, mainly by voting to approve payments to Philip Rosenau and signing checks issued to Rosenau, resulted in a pecuniary gain to himself and /or a business with which he was associated. III. DISCUSSION: As a Member of Council for Laflin Borough ( "Borough "), Luzerne County, from approximately 2000 through January 7, 2008, Respondent Robert Keohane ( "Keohane ") has at all times relevant to these proceedings 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. The allegations are that Keohane violated Sections 1103(a) and 1103(f) of the Ethics Act when he, as a Member of Borough Council, used the authority of his office for the private pecuniary gain of himself and /or a business with which he is associated by participating in actions of Borough Council to make purchases of cleaning supplies from his employer Philip Rosenau, Inc. ( "Philip Rosenau"); when purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau without an open and public process; and when he participated in the process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. 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 following terms related to Section 1103(a) are defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 1102. Definitions "Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public Keohane, 07 -062 Page 8 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 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 1103(f) of the Ethics Act imposes certain restrictions as to contracting: § 1103. Restricted activities (f) Contract. —No public official or public employee or his spouse or child or any business in which the person or his spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract valued at $500 or more with the governmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated or any subcontract valued at $500 or more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated, unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process, including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded. In such a case, the public official or public employee shall not have any supervisory or overall responsibility for the implementation or administration of the contract. Any contract or subcontract made in violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within 90 days of the making of the contract or subcontract. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(f). Keohane, 07 -062 Page 9 Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act provides in part that no public official /public employee or his spouse or child or business with which the public official /public employee or his spouse or child is associated may enter into a contract with his governmental body valued at five hundred dollars or more or any subcontract valued at five hundred dollars or more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body with which the public official /public employee is associated unless the contract is awarded through an open and public process including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded. 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. Keohane served as a Borough Council Member from approximately 2000 through his resignation on January 7, 2008. Keohane also served as the Borough Council President from 2002 through 2007. Borough Council approves bills at its monthly meetings. The Borough Council President, Vice - President, and Secretary /Treasurer sign Borough checks issued to pay vendors. In his private capacity, Keohane is employed as a sales representative for Philip Rosenau, Inc. ( "Philip Rosenau"), a distributor of janitorial maintenance supplies and equipment. Keohane receives a salary from Philip Rosenau. Since 2003 or 2004, Keohane has also received a commission on all products that he sells. Trash collection for Borough residents is contracted by the Borough. Residents are charged an annual trash collection fee and also are required to purchase certain blue trash bags, with "Laflin Borough" printed on the bags, for residential use. The trash bags can be purchased from the Borough. From July 1997 to March 2003, the Borough contracted with a company named "Allied Services" to provide the trash bags. In 2003, Allied Services' costs to supply the trash bags to the Borough increased significantly. In the summer of 2004, the Borough Secretary independently sought quotes from Philip Rosenau and Allied Services for the trash bags. Allied Services provided the Borough a quote of $12.23 per case of 100 trash bags, and Philip Rosenau, represented by Keohane, provided the Borough a quote of $11.98 per case of 100 trash bags. Based upon Philip Rosenau's lower quote, the Borough Secretary made the decision to contract with Philip Rosenau. There was no vote of Borough Council with regard to the contract with Philip Rosenau, and no record exists of the Borough Secretary discussing the quotes with Keohane as a Borough Council Member or obtaining Keohane's approval as a Borough Council Member to purchase the trash bags from Philip Rosenau. Keohane did not solicit the Borough Secretary to provide a quote for the trash bags. On March 1, 2005, the Borough Secretary requested that Allied Services provide a quote for trash bags for 2005. Allied Services did not provide a quote as requested, and the Borough continued to purchase the trash bags from Philip Rosenau. No record exists of quotes for trash bags being sought by the Borough for 2006. The Borough resumed purchasing trash bags from Allied Services in August 2007, after Borough residents raised concerns about Keohane supplying trash bags to the Borough. Philip Rosenau supplied cleaning supplies to the Borough from March 29, 1995, through April 25, 1996, prior to Keohane's service as a Borough Council Member, and from March 13, 2000, through May 2, 2007. Keohane provided quotes for cleaning supplies from Philip Rosenau to the Borough as requested by the Borough Secretary. Although Keohane, 07 -062 Page 10 purchases of cleaning supplies by the Borough from Philip Rosenau were generally less than $100.00 per purchase, the Borough made purchases of cleaning supplies and /or trash bags that were in excess of $500.00 from Philip Rosenau on 12 occasions between 2003 and 2007 as detailed in Fact Finding 19. Invoices from Philip Rosenau were included as part of monthly bill lists submitted to Borough Council for approval. Between January 7, 2002, and May 14, 2007, Keohane voted to approve bill lists that included payment of forty -one (41) of fifty -eight (58) invoices to Philip Rosenau. Keohane signed twenty -one (21) of the thirty -three (33) checks issued by the Borough to Philip Rosenau since April 2000, and seventeen (17) of the twenty -eight (28) checks issued to Philip Rosenau after the Borough switched from Allied Services for trash bags purchases. Keohane was the only Philip Rosenau representative that sold products to the Borough. Keohane is listed as the sales agent on all invoices from Philip Rosenau to the Borough. In or around 2007, Borough residents raised concerns about Keohane supplying trash bags to the Borough. As a result of resident complaints, Keohane decided to no longer have Philip Rosenau supply the trash bags to the Borough. From March 2002 through May 2007, Keohane earned a total of $1,633.46 in commissions from Philip Rosenau for all sales to the Borough. The parties have stipulated that Keohane received a private pecuniary gain for himself and Philip Rosenau, a business with which Keohane is associated, when he used the authority of his public position as a Borough Council Member by actions including voting to approve payments to Philip Rosenau and signing checks issued to Philip Rosenau. See, Fact Finding 28. 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 no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Keohane's use of the authority of his office for the private pecuniary gain of himself and /or a business with which he is associated, in that Keohane did not participate in actions of [Council] to make purchases as he did not vote or otherwise act to select Philip Rosenau, Inc. as a supplier or contractor; b. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(f) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(f) occurred when purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau, Inc; and c. That a technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 11 §1103(a) occurred in relation to Keohane's participation in the process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau, Inc., including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. 4. Keohane agrees to make payment in the amount of $500.00 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. 5. The Investigative Division will recommend that the State Ethics Commission take no further action in this matter; and make no specific recommendations to any law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter. Such, however, does not prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's failure to comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to review this matter further. Consent Agreement, at 1 -2. In considering the Consent Agreement, we agree with the parties that the Stipulated Findings do not establish a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act with regard to the Borough's selection of Philip Rosenau as a supplier or contractor. The Borough Secretary independently sought quotes for the trash bags and cleaning supplies purchased from Philip Rosenau. No record exists of the Borough Secretary discussing the quotes for trash bags with Keohane as a Borough Council member or obtaining Keohane's approval as a Borough Council member to purchase the trash bags from Philip Rosenau. There was no vote of Borough Council with regard to the contract with Philip Rosenau. The Borough Secretary made the decision to contract with Philip Rosenau. Similarly, Keohane provided quotes for cleaning supplies as requested by the Borough Secretary. The Stipulated Findings do not establish a use of authority of office by Keohane as to the selection of Philip Rosenau as a supplier /contractor for the Borough. Accordingly, we hold that no violation of Section 1103(a) the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's alleged use of the authority of his office as to the selection of Philip Rosenau, a business with which Keohane is associated, as a supplier /contractor for purchases made by the Borough, in that Keohane did not vote or otherwise act to select Philip Rosenau as a supplier /contractor for the Borough. However, in considering the Consent Agreement, we accept the recommendation of the parties that a technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's participation in the process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau. Keohane used the authority of his office by voting to approve bills lists that included payments of invoices to Philip Rosenau, and signing checks issued to Philip Rosenau. Such uses of authority of office by Keohane resulted in a private pecuniary gain for himself and Philip Rosenau, as set forth in Fact Finding 28. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 12 Accordingly, we hold that a technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's participation in the Borough's process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau, including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. Cf., Vaughn, Order 1450; Scales, Order 1394. We shall next consider the recommendation of the parties that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act occurred when Borough purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau. On twelve occasions between 2003 through 2007, the Borough made purchases of cleaning supplies and /or trash bags that were in excess of $500.00 from Philip Rosenau. Such purchases were not awarded through an open and public process as required by Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act. Keohane acted on behalf of Philip Rosenau as to such contracts in his capacity as the Philip Rosenau Sales Representative. Although intent is not a requisite element for a violation of the Ethics Act, Yocabet v. State Ethics Commission, 531 A.2d 536 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987), it is one of the factors that this Commission may consider in determining the proper disposition of a case. It would appear from the Stipulated Findings that Keohane did not intentionally violate Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act. We hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act occurred when Borough purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau, a business with which Keohane is associated, without an open and public process. As part of the Consent Agreement, Keohane has agreed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 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. 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, Keohane is directed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30 day after the mailing date 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 Council for Laflin Borough ( "Borough ") from approximately 2000 through January 7, 2008, Respondent Robert Keohane ( "Keohane ") has at all times relevant to these proceedings 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. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's alleged use of the authority of his office as to the selection of Philip Rosenau, Inc. ( "Philip Rosenau"), a business with which Keohane is associated, as a supplier /contractor for purchases made by the Borough, in that Keohane did not vote or otherwise act to select Philip Rosenau as a supplier /contractor for the Borough. Keohane, 07 -062 Page 13 3. A technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's participation in the Borough's process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau, including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. 4. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act occurred when Borough purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau without an open and public process. In Re: Robert Keohane, Respondent ORDER NO. 1489 File Docket: 07 -062 Date Decided: 9/22/08 Date Mailed: 10/10/08 1 Robert Keohane ( "Keohane "), a public official in his capacity as a Member of Council for Laflin Borough ( "Borough ") from approximately 2000 through January 7, 2008, did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to his alleged use of the authority of his office as to the selection of Philip Rosenau, Inc. ( "Philip Rosenau "), a business with which Keohane is associated, as a supplier /contractor for purchases made by the Borough, in that Keohane did not vote or otherwise act to select Philip Rosenau as a supplier /contractor for the Borough. 2. A technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Keohane's participation in the Borough's process of issuing payments to Philip Rosenau, including voting to approve bill lists and signing checks. 3. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act occurred when Borough purchases in excess of $500.00 were made from Philip Rosenau without an open and public process. 4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Keohane is directed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30 ") day after the mailing date of this Order. 5. Compliance with paragraph 4 above 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