The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1534 ARROWIn Re: Judith Arrow, Respondent File Docket: X -ref: Date Decided: Date Mailed: Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair John J. Bolger, Vice Chair Donald M. McCurdy Raquel K. Bergen Nicholas A. Colafella Mark Volk 07 -099 Order No. 1534 9/22/09 10/6/09 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 requested. A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The 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. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 2 I. ALLEGATIONS: That Judith Arrow, a public official /public employee in her capacity as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a) and 1104(a), when, in her capacity as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, she used the authority of her public positions for a private pecuniary benefit, including but not limited to approving and receiving payment for unavailable vacation hours, approving and receiving payment for overtime hours not actually worked, approving and receiving a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board, authorizing and receiving overtime wages when not eligible, and authorizing and receiving wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board; when she participated as a Member of the Authority in voting on Treasurer's Reports in which the payments were documented; when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory; and when she failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2007. II. FINDINGS: 1. Judith Arrow served as a member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township (hereafter Authority) Board of Directors from August 11, 1999, until July 31, 2007. a. Arrow was initially appointed by the Washington Township Board of Supervisors to fill a vacant seat on the Authority board and was subsequently re- appointed to full terms in 2000 and 2005. 1. Arrow resigned as a board member at the July 31, 2007, regular meeting. b. Arrow served as the Board Secretary from January 9, 2000, until February 27, 2007. 1. Arrow submitted a letter of resignation as the Board Secretary at the March 25, 2003, regular Authority meeting. 2. Arrow rescinded her resignation as Board Secretary at the April 15, 2003, Authority special meeting. 2. Arrow also served as an employee of the Authority from approximately February 22, 1982, until July 31, 2007. a. Arrow was initially employed as a clerk/secretarial assistant with the Authority. b. Arrow subsequently served as the office secretary. c. Arrow was most recently employed as the Authority office manager. 1. Arrow was employed as the office manager from approximately January 2002 through July 31, 2008.* *[sic]. [Respondent was terminated from her position as Authority office manager on July 31, 2007. Fact Findings 143 -143 b.] aa. The specific date of Arrow's receipt of the title of office Arrow, 07 -099 Page 3 manager could not be determined. 3. 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. 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 its residents but various adjacent communities surrounding Washington Township as well. 1. The Authority primarily serves residential customers but provides services to select commercial and industrial accounts also. 4. The Authority is currently governed by a nine member board of directors. a. The Authority was governed by a seven member board of directors during Arrow's service as a board member. 5. Various board members are elected into board offices of Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Treasurer, Assistant Secretary, and Assistant Treasurer at annual Authority re- organization meetings. a. Board members serving as officers have no more authority on the board than do board members who hold no office with the exception of signature authority. 1. Signature authority is maintained by the Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary. 6. The Authority board holds one regularly scheduled meeting per month on the last Tuesday of each month. a. Special meetings are held as necessary. 7 Voting at Authority meetings is normally conducted via group "aye /nay" vote after a motion is made and properly seconded. a. b. If any Authority member objects during the group vote, an individual roll call vote is taken and recorded. Any objections or abstentions cast are specifically noted in the minutes. 1. Minutes of Authority board meetings are approved for accuracy at subsequent meetings. 8. Authority board members are provided with a meeting packet the Friday prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 4 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 monthly bill list, other various reports, correspondence, etc. 1. The bill list included in the Treasurer's Report represented all expenses incurred from the beginning to the end of the previous month. 9. 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 (Melvin Weiss) and Treasurer (Ronald Sotta) previously existed at the Authority office for use by Authority staff. 1. Arrow had access to and utilized the facsimile stamps. 2. Facsimile stamps are not currently utilized by Authority office staff. 10. Payroll is issued to Authority employees on a bi- weekly basis. a. Payroll is provided to employees every other Friday. 1. The payroll period begins on Sunday and ends on Saturday of the following week. b. Payroll issued to each Authority employee is specifically documented on each month's bill list. 11. Overtime wages earned by Authority employees are included within the employees' regular payroll checks. a. No description is normally present on the monthly bill list to indicate specific overtime hours worked or specific overtime wages received by individual employees. 12. Overtime hours worked and any leave (vacation time) utilized by Authority plant employees are documented monthly in the plant manager's written report to the Authority board. a. Arrow routinely typed the plant manager's report from a hand written draft during her tenure. b. Arrow calculated the number of overtime hours worked and leave utilized by individuals and added the information to the bottom of the Plant Manager's report. 1. Overtime worked was noted only for plant employees. 2. Overtime was not noted for office staff. 3. Leave utilized (i.e. vacation time) was documented for all plant and office employees. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 5 13. As office manager, Arrow was not required to present a monthly office manager's report to the Authority board. a. Arrow presented no specific information in verbal or written form to the board at Authority meetings documenting overtime hours claimed by administrative employees. 14. The Authority is composed of two separate facilities from which it accomplishes its mission of providing water service. a. The Authority maintains an office for administrative type services (i.e. billing, fee collection, record maintenance, etc.). 1. The Authority office is located at 1390 Fayette Avenue, Belle Vernon, PA 15012. b. The Authority maintains a treatment plant for treatment and distribution of water. a. 1. The treatment plant is located on Route 201 South, Fayette City, PA approximately one mile from the Authority office. 15. Ronald Deitch was employed with the Authority from the mid- 1960's until his retirement in December 2003. a. Deitch initially submitted his letter of resignation at the September 30, 2003, regular meeting to be effective October 31, 2003. b. Deitch extended his retirement date until December 31, 2003, at the October 28, 2003, regular meeting. 16. Deitch served as the overall Authority manager from at least 1980 until approximately January 2002. While employed as the Authority manager, Deitch was responsible for the day -to -day operations of both the administrative office and treatment plant. 1. Although Deitch was technically responsible for the management of the administrative office, Arrow conducted actual management of the administrative office as the office secretary. 17. Deitch served solely as the plant manager from approximately January 2002 until his retirement at the end of December 2003. a. As plant manager, Deitch was responsible only for maintenance and operations of the treatment plant. b. Arrow received the title of office manager when Deitch became plant manager. 18. At the January 28, 2002, Authority regular meeting, the Authority board discussed the need for standardized employee policies, new Authority Rules and Regulations, and requested that recently drafted employee job descriptions be presented to the board. a. The Authority board requested that Judy Spray contact other authorities and Arrow, 07 -099 Page 6 obtain models of employee manuals from which an Authority policy manual could be developed. 1. Spray is employed as a Grant Administrator with Bankson Engineers. aa. Bankson Engineers is the Authority's engineering company. 2. Spray attended and took minutes at Authority meetings from at least January 2002 through July 2007. aa. Spray did not attend or take minutes at reorganization meetings or special meetings held. bb. Arrow was responsible for taking minutes at reorganization meetings and special meetings at which Spray was not present. b. The Authority board authorized Bankson Engineers to draft new Authority Rules and Regulations. c. Arrow was present at the meeting. 19. As Office Manager and Board member, Arrow reviewed the manuals gathered by Spray and generated a draft copy of a Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual which was distributed to the board prior to the February 26, 2002, meeting. a. At the February 26, 2002, meeting, Chairman Thomas Canigiani appointed himself, Weiss, Arrow, and Deitch to a committee responsible for reviewing the manual and job descriptions. 1. Draft job descriptions were also distributed prior to the February 26, 2002, meeting. 20. The initial presentation by the committee to the board regarding the policy manual, job descriptions, and rules and regulations occurred at the June 18, 2002, regular board meeting. a. Canigiani presented the information to the board and explained that the committee was continuing its review of the items. 21. The Authority subsequently called a special meeting on October 8, 2002, for the purpose of reviewing the Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual among other issues. a. Each section of the manual was discussed and reviewed at the meeting with additions and corrections offered by then Solicitor Mark Ramsier. 22. At the special meeting, Deitch questioned the differentiation between salary and hourly employees as it related to Page 19, Paragraph 3 of the manual. a. Minutes note the employment of only one individual on an hourly basis at the Authority at that time. 1. The individual in the hourly position was not identified. b. Suggestion was made to re -write the section identified and establish a new policy defining between salary and hourly employees. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 7 23. The Authority approved the adoption of the Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual at the January 28, 2003, regular meeting of the Authority board. a. Arrow was present at the meeting and voted to approve the policy manual. b. All employees were to receive a copy of the manual and sign a receipt acknowledging such. 1. Arrow signed a receipt on February 3, 2003, acknowledging her receipt of the manual. 24. On March 3, 2003, a special meeting was held by the Authority board for the purpose of reviewing employee concerns regarding the adoption of the policy manual. a. Specifically noted in the minutes of the meeting is that all Authority employees at that time were salaried with the exception of one plant employee. 1. The meeting occurred prior to the unionization of the Authority plant which eventually resulted in all plant employees being designated as hourly employees with the exception of the Plant Manager who remained a salary employee. aa. Administrative personnel were not included in the Union. 25. On June 30, 2003, a special meeting of the Authority board was held for the purpose of reviewing changes made in the policy manual prior to adoption. a. The meeting closed with the adoption of the manual with changes presented. 1. Job descriptions for Authority positions were included in the manual. b. The motion to adopt the manual passed unanimously. c. Arrow was present at the meeting and voted to approve the policy manual. d. Arrow was completely familiar with the manual as a result of typing the document throughout its various amendments. 26. The adopted Authority Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual addresses various issues including, but not limited to, the following: Employment, Attendance /Time Off, Compensation, and Notification of Personnel Changes. a. Each section noted is broken down into individual applicable topics. 27. The Policy Manual Statement specifies that modifications to the manual will be required as policies and benefits change. a. The Statement documents that the manual was originally adopted on January 28, 2003. b. The Statement notes that the manual was last amended in October 2005. 1. The applicable amendments made in October 2005 are not specifically identified. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 8 28. Policy No. 1.2 in the manual references "Definition of Employee Status" and documents, in part, the following: a. Office employees are considered full -time with established office hours of 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. 1. Office employees were considered full -time although office personnel were scheduled only thirty -five hours per week. 29. Policy No. 2.1 in the manual references "Hours of Work" and "Lunch Periods." a. Regular work hours for administrative personnel were 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on recognized holidays. 1. Fifteen recognized holidays totaling fourteen days off were documented in Section 2.6 of the manual including: New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Day, President's Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Community Picnic Day, Labor Day, Veteran's Day, Thanksgiving Day, Day after Thanksgiving, Monday after Thanksgiving, Christmas Eve Day (one - half day), Christmas Day, and New Year's Eve (one -half day). b. Administrative personnel received a thirty minute unpaid lunch period. 30. Policy No. 2.3 in the manual addresses "Recording Hours Worked" and states, in part, the following: a. Authority employees, both plant and administrative personnel, are required to punch a time clock to record their attendance each day. b. Time cards are to be punched at the beginning and end of the workday, the beginning and end of the lunch period, and at the beginning and end of any overtime worked. 1. Each employee is required to punch his /her own time card. aa. Employees are strictly prohibited from punching one another's time cards. 2. All employees are to be paid for scheduled time only. 3. No employee is to start or end work before their regularly scheduled starting or quitting time, unless prior authorization to work overtime is approved by the immediate supervisor. 31. Policy No. 2.4 references "Overtime and Compensatory Time" and states, in part, the following: a. The Authority adheres to Federal and State wage and hour regulations regarding overtime including categories identified as Exempt Employees and Non - Exempt Employees. 1. Exempt employees including executives, administrative personnel, and professionals as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act are considered exempt from the act. Tenure Vacation Earned _Employment After 1 year 1 Week After 5 years 2 weeks After 8 years 3 weeks After 15 years 4 weeks After 20 years 5 weeks Arrow, 07 -099 Page 9 aa. Minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply. bb. Hours worked in excess of forty per week are to be compensated with compensatory /flex hours when hours worked over forty are excessive. 2. Non - exempt employees including non - executives, non - administrative personnel, and non - professionals as defined by the Fair Labor Standards Act are considered non - exempt. aa. Non - exempt regular full -time employees are entitled to receive one and one -half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in any workweek. b. The employee's supervisor must approve any overtime. 1. Supervisors are required to submit an Overtime Request Form to the office manager for approval indicating the name of the employee(s) to work overtime and the total number of overtime hours to be worked. 32. Policy No. 2.7 addresses "Vacations" and provides a schedule of vacation earned based on tenure with the Authority as shown below: a. The Authority does not permit vacation to be accumulated from year to year. b. Employees may take up to one week of vacation one day at a time or in one - half day increments. 33. Policy No. 3.1 references "Wage and Salary Administration." a. The "Office Personnel - Salaries" section documents that the office manager's beginning salary is negotiated with the Authority Board. b. The office clerk's starting salary is noted as $10.00 per hour. 34. Arrow's job description as the Authority office manager is set forth under Policy No. 9.5 of the Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual and notes, in part, the following: a. The office manager is to direct the day -to -day operations of the Authority business office. b. The office manager is responsible for all business aspects of the Authority, including, but not limited to, the following: 1. Responsible for directing the efficient and reliable day -to- day operations of an office; such as, greeting customers, handling customer requests and problems, answering telephone in a knowledgeable, accurate, and friendly Arrow, 07 -099 Page 10 manner; at all times displaying courtesy and skilled public relations. 2. Responsible for the issuance of water bills in a timely and accurate manner. 3. Must be able to learn and accurately handle the authority computer. 4. Must be able to complete required reports issued by the plant manager or his assistants, as well as quarterly reports required by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 5. Must be willing and able to perform duties as assigned by the plant manager in a timely and accurate fashion. 6. Must be able to handle employee payroll and its directives as issued by employee, supervision, or state mandate. 7. Must be able to work independently and without regular supervision in order to meet required deadlines. 8. Perform work as delegated by those in Authority in a timely and efficient manner. 9. Preparation of all necessary data for yearly budgets of the Authority. 10. Preparation of all necessary data for yearly audits of the Authority. 11. Knowledge of all secretarial duties and the abilities to make sound judgment calls in work performance. 12. Maintain a professional appearance at all times. 13. Matters pertaining to discipline are reported to the Authority board. c. The job description specifically documents that the office manager is to report to the Authority board. d. Arrow created the job description for the position of office manager. 35. From at least July 2002 through July 2007, the Authority employed Arrow and Laura Snyder as full -time administrative personnel in the Authority office. a. Snyder was employed in the position of office clerk. 1. Arrow was Snyder's immediate supervisor. 36. The Authority employed Patricia Canigiani and Dawn Murt at separate times as part -time office assistants between the dates of July 2002 into December 2004. a. Canigiani was employed with the Authority from at least July 2001 until January 11, 2003. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 11 1. Canigiani submitted a letter of resignation to the Authority effective January 11, 2003. b. Murt was employed with the Authority from approximately January 2003 into December 2004. 1. Murt was separated from employment with the Authority as a result of the Authority being over budget. c. Arrow had supervisory responsibility over Canigiani and Murt during their respective tenures. d. No part -time personnel were employed in the Authority administrative office from December 12, 2004, through December 31, 2006. 37. Both Arrow and Snyder maintained regular work hours of Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. a. Both Arrow and Snyder received a thirty minute unpaid lunch period. 38. All employees of the Authority, including office employees, were required to utilize time clocks to document hours worked as of at least January 2005. a. The decision for all employees to utilize time clocks was made by the Authority board after the unionization of plant employees. 1. The initial Union contract was approved by the Authority board at the December 21, 2004, regular board meeting. b. Re- classification of various plant employees from salaried to hourly employees occurred approximately three to four months after acceptance of the Union contract. 1. The re- classifications occurred via official board resolutions. c. No time clock punch cards could be located for administrative personnel prior to January 2005. 39. From January 2005 forward, both Arrow and Snyder were required to punch the time clock located in the Authority administrative office to document hours worked. a. Arrow considered herself an hourly employee from the beginning of January 2005 until the time of her separation from the Authority. 1. Arrow was previously classified as a salaried employee. 2. Arrow considered herself to be an hourly employee as a result of being required to utilize a time clock. aa. In a sworn statement provided to Attorney Timothy Maatta on June 19, 2007, Arrow stated, "I punch a time clock. Therefore, am paid hourly." b. Arrow considered herself to be an hourly employee although no specific re- classification was approved by the Authority board. 40. Payroll for Authority employees was processed by Snyder. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 12 a. Snyder received time cards from the Plant Manager on a bi- weekly basis for processing. b. Snyder personally gathered administrative personnel's time cards, including Arrow's, for processing. c. Arrow completed payroll processing when Snyder was not available. 41. Once received /obtained, Snyder transferred hours worked from employee time cards to bi- weekly payroll sheets documenting the total number of hours worked during each day of the payroll period. a. Bi- weekly payroll sheets completed by Snyder specifically documented the amount of overtime hours claimed by and overtime wages paid to Authority employees. b. Employee payroll sheets and /or actual time cards were not presented to the Authority board for review at monthly meetings. 42. Snyder, or Arrow in Snyder's absence, generated actual payroll checks via the Authority computer for distribution once the Authority payroll was processed. a. Arrow routinely signed employee payroll checks as one of the two required authorized signatories for the Authority. 1. Arrow had signature authority over Authority accounts in her position of Board secretary. 2. Arrow and Snyder were authorized to and routinely utilized the chairman's or treasurer's facsimile name stamps to obtain the required second signature on Authority checks. b. Occasional examples exist of Authority checks having been authorized by the live signature and facsimile stamp (one each) of the board chairman and treasurer. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ARROW'S RECEIPT OF COMPENSATION FROM THE AUTHORITY BY WAY OF VACATION PAYOUTS ISSUED FOR VACATION DAYS NOT AVAILABLE 43. As an Authority employee, Arrow earned a specific number of vacation days annually based on her employment tenure with the Authority. a. Employees were encouraged to utilize vacation time within the calendar year in which it was earned. b. Vacation time was to be kept on record by the supervisor and submitted with time cards to the office manager. c. Office personnel were not to schedule vacation during billing or collection periods. 44. The Authority did not provide sick or personal time to employees during Arrow's tenure. a. Authority personnel were permitted to leave the Authority plant or office for Arrow, 07 -099 Page 13 doctor's appointments, limited personal matters, etc. without claiming the time while classified as salary employees. 1. The practice was not officially authorized by the Authority board. 2. The practice was endorsed by Deitch during his tenure as Authority /Plant Manager. 3. The practice did not apply to consecutive days missed regarding illness, personal issues, etc. 45. In a sworn statement provided to Attorney Timothy Maatta on June 19, 2007, Arrow stated the following regarding sick/personal time: a. That has been a subject that - - -my whole work career, I could take time off and be paid for it. But once I started punching a clock, that's when it became an issue." b. When you are a salaried person, you can miss as many days as you want and your pay will not be deducted. But when I became where I -- what do I want to say? When I punched a time clock, that's when my days changed. Now every time I have to make an appointment for a doctor, I take a vacation day." 46. Arrow's statement to Matta on June 19, 2007, that salary employees can miss as many days as they wanted without having their payroll deducted was not shared by the Authority board. a. During a special meeting held on March 3, 2003, to discuss the Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual, the issue of salaried personnel and their ability to be absent from work for multiple days was discussed by the Board. 1. The subject was specifically discussed in regard to bereavement days granted to Authority employees per the Personnel and Policy Procedures Manual. 2. Arrow was present at and took minutes at the meeting. aa. Minutes of the meeting were transcribed verbatim. 47. During the discussion of the March 3, 2003, Board meeting, Ramsier questioned the possibility and concerns of Authority employees being able to indiscriminately take multiple days off due to the salaried classification. a. Then assistant plant manager Sil Martini indicated that the Authority previously had such an employee. b. Martini stated that the employee in question was "gone." c. Ramsier indicated that the board needed to have some method in procedure that the board could deal with the people they have to supervise. d. Ramsier suggested that a set of written rules had to be established that everybody was required to follow. e. Discussion on the topic concluded with the decision that salaried employees at the plant and office were considered equal pertaining to the manual. Date(s) Time Used (Hours) Time Card /Sheet Explanation 03/10/03 to 03/14/03 35.0 Hours 111 03/17/03 to 03/21/03 35.0 Hours 111 03/24/03 to 03/27/03 28.0 Hours No Explanation 03/31/03 to 04/04/03 31.5 Hours 03/31= Worked 1/2 Explanation Day, No 05/02/03 3.5 Hours 1/2 Day — Vacation 05/14/03 7.0 Hours Vacation Arrow, 07 -099 Page 14 48. After being re- classified as hourly employees at the March 3, 2003, meeting, Authority employees were no longer permitted to attend doctor's appointments, take personal time, etc. while on Authority time. a. Employees were required to utilize vacation time for any time absent from the Authority during normal scheduled hours in order to receive payment for the hours missed. b. Employees were permitted to utilize'/ vacation day or single vacation days for doctor's appointments, personal business, etc. 49. Arrow was eligible to use five weeks (twenty five days /one hundred seventy -five hours) of vacation time as of February 22, 2002. a. Arrow had been employed by the Authority for twenty years as of February 22, 2002. b. Authority employees with twenty -plus years of service were entitled to five weeks vacation per the Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual. 50. Office personnel did not track running use of vacation time by Authority employees on any specific log or report. a. Documentation of vacation time utilized was present only on time cards and time sheets ultimately processed by Arrow or Snyder. 51. Authority employees have received payment near the end of the calendar year for vacation hours unused during the calendar year. a. There is no specific provision in the Personnel and Policy Procedures Manual that either permits or prohibits payouts to employees for unused vacation time during a calendar year. b. Payout for unused employee vacation time is an accepted practice at the Authority. 52. The Authority board does not hold a specific vote to authorize the payment of unused vacation time to Authority employees. a. Checks issued to employees representative of unused vacation time payouts are documented on the monthly bill list presented to the board for approval with the Treasurer's Report at the regular monthly meetings. 53. From January 1, 2003, through December 31, 2003, Arrow was absent from the Authority for a minimum of one hundred forty hours (twenty work days) due to illness, vacation, or reasons not specifically noted as shown in the chart below: Date(s) Time Used (Hours) Time Card /Sheet Explanation Time Card /Shee Explanation 08/16/04 to 08/20/04 35.0 Hours Vacation 08/30/04 to 09/03/04 35.0 Hours Vacation 09/07/04 7.0 Hours Vacation 09/14/04 7.0 Hours Vacation 11/23/04 and 11/24/04 14.0 Hours Vacation 11/29/04 to 12/01/04 21.0 Hours Vacation 12/27/04 and 12/30/04 14.0 Hours Vacation Total 133.0 Hours Date(s) Time Used (Hours) Time Card /Sheet Explanation Time Card /Shee Explanation 140.0 Hours 03/08/05 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. Date(s) Time Used ( Hours) Time Card /Sheet Explanation Total 140.0 Hours Arrow, 07 -099 Page 15 a. Arrow received her full wages for each pay period during which she was absent from the Authority during normal work days. 1. Arrow's equivalent hourly wage in 2003 was $17.35 per hour. 54. Although she utilized at least one hundred forty hours in vacation in 2003, Arrow did not deduct any vacation hours from the number of vacation hours she accrued in 2003. a. Arrow eventually was compensated for these hours by the Authority as unused vacation time. 55. Arrow was absent at least an additional forty -two hours throughout the course of 2003 for doctor's appointments or personal reasons for which she was paid full wages without utilizing leave as a result of her salaried position. a. The incidents were not representative of several consecutive day absences from the Authority during normal work days. 56. From January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2004, Arrow was absent from the Authority for a minimum of one hundred thirty -three hours (nineteen work days) as a result of vacation days /leave taken as shown in the chart below: a. Arrow received her full wages for each pay period during which she was absent from the Authority during normal work days. 1. Arrow's equivalent hourly wage in 2004 was $17.85 per hour. 57. Arrow was absent at least an additional twenty -four and one -half hours throughout the course of 2004 for doctor's appointments or personal reasons for which she was paid full wages without claiming leave as a result of her salaried position. a. The incidents were not representative of several consecutive day absences from the Authority during normal work days. 58. From January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005, Arrow was absent from the Authority for a minimum of ninety -one hours (thirteen work days) due to doctor's appointments, vacation, and other reasons not noted as shown in the chart below: Date(s) Time Used (Hours)', Explanation 01/16/06 3.5 Hours 1/2 Day Vacation 02/27/06 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 03/15/06 7.0 Hours Vacation 04/05/06 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 04/18/06 7.0 Hours Vacation 04/27/06 and 04/28/06 14.0 Hours Vacation 05/22/06 and 05/23/06 14.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 05/31/06 to 06/02/06 21.0 Hours III - Vacation 06/07/06 7.0 Hours III - Vacation 06/09/06 7.0 Hours III - Vacation 06/20/06 and 06/21/06 7.0 Hours 1/2 Vacation Days(2) 06/26/06 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 06/27/06 3.5 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 06/29/06 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 07/31/06 and 08/01/06 14.0 Hours Vacation 10/30/06 and 10/31/06 14.0 Hours Vacation 12/05/06 3.5 Hours Dr.'s Appt. Total 150.5 Hours Date(s) Time Used (Hours) Time Card/Sheet Explanation 03/11/05 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 04/21/05 7.0 Hours Vacation 06/21/05 7.0 Hours Vacation 07/12/05 7.0 Hours No Explanation 08/09/05 and 08/10/05 14.0 Hours Vacation 08/19/05 3.5 Hours Vacation 08/31/05 to 09/02/05 17.5 Hours Vacation 09/16/05 3.5 Hours No Explanation 09/29/05 7.0 Hours Vacation 11/09/05 7.0 Hours Dr.'s Appt. 11/23/05 3.5 Hours 1 / Day Vacation Total 91.0 Hours Arrow, 07 -099 Page 16 a. Arrow received her full wages for each pay period during which she was absent from the Authority during normal work days. 1. Arrow's equivalent hourly wage in 2005 was $18.95 per hour. b. Although having used at least ninety -one hours in vacation, Arrow deducted only sixty -two vacation hours from the number of vacation hours she accrued in 2005. c. As a result of considering herself an hourly employee in 2005, Arrow was required to utilize vacation hours for all leave taken (i.e. vacation, doctor's appointments, personal time, etc). 59. From January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006, Arrow was absent from the Authority for a minimum of one hundred fifty and one -half hours (twenty -one and one -half work days) due to doctor's appointments, vacation taken, and other personal reasons as shown in the chart below: a. Arrow received her full wages for each pay period during which she was absent from the Authority during normal work days. Year Vacation Hourly Vacation Vacation Amount of Hours Payout Rate Hours Hours Vacation Overpa !' Documented Available Used Hours Paid 2003 $3,036.25 17.35 175.0 140.0 175.0 140.0 2004 749.70 17.85* 175.0 133.0 42.0 0.0 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 17 1. Arrow's equivalent hourly wage in 2006 was $21.86 per hour. 60. Although having used at least one hundred fifty and one -half hours in vacation, Arrow did not deduct any hours used from her vacation hours accrued in 2006. a. As an hourly employee in 2006, Arrow was required to utilize vacation hours for all leave taken (i.e. vacation, doctor's appointments, personal time, etc.). b. The explanations for Arrow's leave usage noted in finding no. 71 [sic] were provided by Arrow to Janie Tikey of Savarno & Company during Tikey's interview of Arrow relating to a payroll audit conducted for calendar year 2006. 61. Arrow issued or directed Snyder to issue her checks from the Authority payroll account representing payment of vacation time allegedly unused in 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 which totaled $13,578.15 (gross) as shown below: Check Check Check Amount Authorized Year For Date Number (Gross) Signatories Which Issued 12/30/03 2075 $3,036.25 Weiss /Sotta 2003 01/14/05 2565 749.70 Arrow /Weiss 2004 11/28/05 1377 2,141.20 Arrow /Weiss 2005 11/13/06 1803 7,651.00 Arrow /Weiss 2006 Total $13,578.15 a. Check numbers 2075 and 2565 were issued from the Authority payroll account maintained at PNC Bank at that time. b. Check numbers 1377 and 1803 were issued from the Authority payroll account maintained at National City Bank at that time. 62. Arrow signed check number 2565, 1377, and 1803 as an authorized signatory for the Authority. a. Weiss's signature appears as an authorized signatory on all four checks issued. 1. Weiss's signature was applied to all checks via his facsimile stamp with the exception of check number 2075. b. Sotta's signature as an authorized signatory was affixed via facsimile stamp to check number 2075. 63. Although Arrow utilized 514.5 hours of vacation time out of a total 700 hours earned, during the 2003 through 2006 time period, Arrow received payment for six hundred and eighty hours of unused vacation time totaling $15,578.15 [sic] (gross) as shown below: Year Hours Hourly Over Payment Applicable vacation Hours Used Over. aid Rate Gross Check No. 2005 2,141.20 18.95 175.0 91.0 2003 140.0 $17.35 $2,429.00 2075 2004 0.0 17.85 0.00 2565 2005 29.0 18.95 549.55 1377 2006 325.5 21.86 7,115.43 1803 Total 494.5 $10,093.98 Year 'Vacation Pa yout Documented Hourly Rate vacation Hours Available ' vacation Hours Used Amount of Vacation Hours Paid Hours Overpaid >' 2005 2,141.20 18.95 175.0 91.0 113.0 29.0 2006 7,651.00 21.86 175.0 150.5 350.0 325.5 Total $13,578.15 700.0 514.50 680.0 494.5 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 18 *Rate as of January 2005 when check issued a. Arrow was responsible for tracking the amount of vacation she had utilized. b. Arrow as Snyder's direct supervisor, directed Snyder of the number of vacation hours for which she (Arrow) was to be compensated. 64. As a result of the use of her public position, Arrow received overpayment for a total of 494.5 hours in 2003, 2005, and 2006 totaling $10,093.98 (gross) as shown below: a. Arrow's vacation payout and the number of hours for which she was paid was correct for the 2004 calendar year. 65. Arrow maintains a personal, joint checking account with her spouse (William Arrow) at National City Bank. a. Arrow and her spouse are the only authorized signatories on the account. 66. Of the four checks Arrow received representative of vacation payouts, check number 2565 was cashed while check numbers 1377 and 1803 were deposited into Arrow's personal account at National City Bank. a. The specific disposition of check number 2075 could not be determined due to poor photocopy quality. 1. Arrow's signature is present on the reverse side of check number 2075 endorsing the check. b. A portion of the funds deposited via check number 1803 were immediately received in cash upon negotiation. 67. Check numbers 2075, 2565, and 1803 were documented on bill lists presented for approval at the January 27, 2004, February 22, 2005, and December 19, 2006, regular Authority meetings respectively. a. Arrow was present at and voted affirmatively to approve the Treasurer's Reports at each of the meetings at which vacation payouts to Arrow were documented on the monthly bill list. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 19 68. The bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the January 27, 2004, meeting specifically noted check number 2075 having been issued to Arrow as a vacation payout. a. No documentation was noted on the bill lists presented with the Treasurer's Reports at the February 22, 2005, or December 19, 2006, meetings to indicate check numbers 2565 and 1803 were issued to Arrow as vacation payouts. 69. Check number 1377 was not documented on any bill list for approval by the Authority board. a. The bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the December 20, 2005, regular Authority board meeting notes the consecutive issuance of check numbers 1348 through 1384 with the exception of check number 1377. 1. Check number 1377 is the only check number missing from the consecutive run of payroll checks documented on the bill list. 70. Arrow realized a private pecuniary benefit of $10,093.98 (gross) by submitting and receiving payment for vacation hours not available as the Authority office manager, when she voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists on which payment for excess vacation hours were documented, and when she signed three of the four checks she received as an authorized Authority signatory for vacation hours she was not entitled to receive. a. Arrow received $2,429.00 (gross) in payment for one hundred forty excess vacation hours in 2003. b. Arrow received $549.55 (gross) for 29 excess vacation hours in 2005. c. Arrow received $7,115.43 (gross) in payment for 325.5 excess vacation hours in 2006. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS ADDRESS ALLEGATIONS THAT ARROW CLAIMED AND RECEIVED OVERTIME WAGES FOR HOURS NOT WORKED AND SUBSEQUENTLY PARTICIPATED IN VOTES TO APPROVE BILL LISTS (I.E. PAYROLL) ON WHICH PAYMENT FOR HOURS NOT WORKED WAS INCLUDED 71. At the August 27, 2002, regular meeting of the Authority, the Board approved the purchase of Inhance 5000 and Cougar Mountain Software for use at the Authority office. a. The Inhance 5000 software program was a billing program capable of tracking up to five thousand accounts in relation to client billing. b. The Cougar Mountain program was a general ledger program to be used for financial accounting /management at the administrative office. c. Neither Arrow nor Snyder had any prior practical experience with either software package. 1. Both Arrow and Snyder required training on the software packages. 2. The decision to utilize the programs at the Authority was based on reports provided by board members who had observed the programs Arrow, 07 -099 Page 20 in operation at other utility systems. 72. The board vote authorizing the purchase of the software included a reference to per diem training costs. a. No identification of the training provider was noted in the minutes. 73. The Authority was required to network the existing computers at the Authority office in order to properly utilize the new systems. a. The networking was required so that information could be shared from one computer to another. b. Neither Arrow nor Snyder had the technological expertise to perform the required networking. 74. The Authority had two existing computer stations at the administrative office which required networking. a. One computer was established as a work station in the front office area. 1. Snyder primarily worked from the work station at the front office. b. The remaining computer was located in Arrow's private office. 75. Arrow subsequently contacted and retained Ed Barnes of Barnes Computer Consulting to complete the required networking for the Authority. a. Arrow retained Barnes for the required services without formal board approval. 1. Authority minutes note no official vote to hire Barnes. 76. After completion of the required networking, Barnes maintained his professional relationship with the Authority via various other projects including installation of a new computer workstation; computer server; cash register computer and cash drawer; and providing training regarding Cougar Mountain Software and Quickbooks. a. The new computer workstation was installed in the front office area. 1. Snyder received the new computer workstation as Snyder completed the bulk of the billing work for the Authority. b. The cash register computer and cash drawer were installed in association with a bar code billing system implemented on customer water bill statements. c. Training on the Cougar Mountain Software and Quickbooks occurred on an intermittent, as- needed basis. d. Arrow approved the continued use of Barnes for various Authority projects with no official presentation to the board for action /vote. 77. Arrow and Snyder eventually became disenchanted with the Inhance billing software and enlisted Barnes to develop new billing software for the Authority. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 21 a. Arrow and Snyder experienced problems with Inhance Software. b. Arrow and Snyder requested that Barnes incorporate various features from an old DOS based software package that had been custom made for the Authority along with various features from the Inhance program and develop a new Windows based billing system. 78. Barnes developed new billing software for the Authority based on specifications provided by Arrow and Snyder. a. The utilization of the program developed by Barnes revolved around the basic concept of data entry. 1. Information to be entered /posted included customer information, customer updates, customer readings, customer payments, billings, etc. b. Arrow and Snyder continually requested Barnes to amend features desired within the new billing program. 79. Barnes's program was operational in its basic form at or about the end of 2005 /beginning of 2006. a. The Authority was able to utilize Barnes's program for the billing associated with the last quarter of 2005. b. All of the features desired in the program were not yet operational at that time. 80. Barnes continually trained Arrow and Snyder on the use of the new software as he developed it. a. Although Barnes's program facilitated the billing process, Arrow and Snyder encountered occasional operational problems /difficulties which required Barnes's attention. 1. Problems with the software were corrected by Barnes on a timely basis as they occurred upon notification by Arrow or Snyder. b. In addition to continued work performed on the new billing software, Barnes was retained to assist in the update and computerization of the Authority's General Ledger for required annual audits. 1. Barnes was retained by Arrow to assist in the update and computerization of the Authority's General Ledgers. 2. No specific board vote was taken to approve the hiring of Barnes for said services. 81. Municipal Authorities are required to file an annual report with the Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED) and with the parent governing body per provisions of the Municipal Authorities Act of 1945. a. Municipal Authorities are required to have a Certified Public Accountant conduct an annual audit to be included with the report provided to DCED and the parent governing body. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 22 b. The Authority routinely appointed Milinovich & Company, Inc. as the Authority Auditor at its annual reorganization meetings. 1. Although appointed as the Authority Auditor for calendar years 2004, 2005, [and] 2006, Milinovich & Company did not complete the annual audit of the Authority as required for those years. aa. The necessary audits were not completed due to a combination of health related issues encountered by both Milinovich and Arrow spanning the years in question. 82. The Authority decided by fall 2006 to have the audits completed because the Municipal Authorities Act required annual audits and an existing PennVest loan the Authority had at the time required an audit. a. The Authority had entered into a loan agreement with the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority (PennVest) on May 9, 2001, under agreement number 80096, to borrow principal up to $3,200,000.00 for major construction purposes. b. PennVest refused to release approximately $159,998.00 of the funds until audit reports for 2003, 2004, and 2005 were provided. 83. Arrow subsequently contacted Edward A. Savarno & Company, CPAs, to gauge Savarno's interest in completing the past due audits. a. Savarno responded to the Authority's inquiry via correspondence dated October 17, 2006, confirming the scope of services to be [conducted for] the 2003, 2004, and 2005 Authority audits as well as the Annual Report of Municipal Authorities for Pennsylvania for years ended December 31, 2003, 2004, and 2005. 1. Arrow signed the letter on October 18, 2006, as the board Secretary confirming the Authority's understanding of the scope as presented by Savarno. 84. The Authority Board voted to appoint Savarno as the new Authority Auditor at the October 31, 2006, regular Authority meeting. a. Savarno was eventually retained to perform the Authority audit for 2006 and 2007 as well. 85. Janie Tikey was employed as a Technical Accounting Manager with Savarno & Company when the firm was retained by the Authority. a. Tikey was the primary Savarno & Company representative involved with the Authority audit for years 2003 through 2005. 86. Upon review of available records at the Authority office, it was discovered that the Authority had no computerized billing or general ledger system to utilize as a beginning point for the audit process. a. Physical documents provided to Savarno representatives included Authority check registers, statements, and cancelled checks from its various accounts to document checks issued. b. The majority of recordkeeping activities were performed manually by office Arrow, 07 -099 Page 23 personnel. 1. Although Quickbooks was utilized at the Authority office, it was utilized on a limited basis only. 87. Arrow was informed that the required audits could not be initiated until a trial balance or general ledger was prepared to utilize as a beginning point for the audit. a. Generation of a general ledger required the entering of all of the Authority's financial information for each of the audit years into Quickbooks or a similar accounting program. 1. The necessity to computerize Authority financial information for 2003, 2004, and 2005 lead to Arrow retaining Barnes for the required data entry. 88. Barnes completed the required entry of the financial information from approximately October 2006 through December 2006. a. Barnes completed all of the data entry associated with the computerization of the Authority's financial records for calendar years 2003, 2004, and 2005. b. Arrow did not perform any of the data entry associated with computerization of the Authority's financial information. 89. Although Arrow did not perform any data entry associated with the computerization of the Authority's financial information, Arrow completed work associated with conduction of the past due audits as well as other additional work in 2005 and 2006. a. Arrow participated in manually breaking down Authority revenues from sales for audit years 2003, 2004, and 2005 as a result of the Inhance computer program failing to do so. 1. Arrow also performed work in association with Savarno's changing of the Authority's accounting procedures /system. b. Examples of additional work performed by Arrow in 2005 and 2006 included work performed on the Policy and Procedures Manual, work performed on the Authority PennVest loan, work regarding personnel issues, and work for Tim Federle (Authority Labor Attorney) among other work. 90. Extra work associated with the audits, personnel issues, PennVest, etc. caused Arrow to perform work at the Authority office prior to the beginning of her normal shift, after completion of her normal shift, or on weekends and /or from her residence in the evenings, on weekends, etc. a. Arrow's vehicle was observed in the Authority parking lot at times during the regular workweek beyond normal administrative office hours as well as on weekends. 1. Various time cards for Arrow document Arrow punching in prior to 8:30 a.m., punching out after 4:00 p.m., and punching in and out on weekends. b. Arrow documented her hours worked at home during the week and on weekends in a personal calendar /day planner. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 24 1 Arrow documented the total number of hours that she worked at home on Authority business on a daily basis in her personal calendar /day planner. aa. Arrow represented the total number of hours spent on Authority work at home by writing a specific number as well as a general work description in the section for the day of the week/date allegedly worked. bb. Any dates with no specific number /work description written in the applicable section represent days that Arrow did not perform Authority work at home. 91. Arrow claimed hours at the Authority office beyond her normal work days and hours as well as hours performing work for the Authority from her home as overtime hours. a. Overtime hours claimed by Arrow and the wages associated with those hours were routinely included with Arrow's normal bi- weekly payroll checks or issued via separate payroll check. 1. Arrow received three checks in 2006 solely representative of extra hours allegedly worked by Arrow at her home. 2. Payroll checks in Arrow's name were normally processed by Snyder at Arrow's direction or processed by Arrow personally in Snyder's absence. aa. Arrow directed Snyder on the amount of overtime hours to include in each payroll and /or extra check received. 92. Arrow received tacit approval from Weiss, Chairman of the Board at that time, to work overtime needed in association with work to be completed. a. Arrow did not obtain formal approval from the Authority board for overtime as required by the Personnel and Policy Manual in effect in 2005 and 2006. 1. The Personnel and Policy Manual required that prior approval be obtained from the applicable employee's supervisor. b. Weiss gave no specific written authorization to Arrow for overtime. c. Arrow was to answer to the Authority board per the job description approved for the office manager position. 1. Weiss was not Arrow's sole immediate supervisor. d. No written documentation exists regarding the approval for Arrow to work and receive payment for overtime hours. 93. Arrow claimed to have worked significant numbers of overtime hours from her home during the 2005 and 2006 calendar years. a. Arrow's overtime hours allegedly worked at home are unsupported by any documentation with the exception of Arrow's personal calendars /day planners for 2005 and 2006. Date 2005 Calendar 2006 Calendar 12/26/2005 OFFICE CLOSED. Slept `till 8:30 @ Jupes & got home @ noon after we ate breakfast - bathed -did hair- and had first meeting with Community Action Committee- Home @ 8- fiddled around & went to bed-Ed Barnes being a jerk!- Marcella Lloyd died Saturday (No hours claimed) OFFICE CLOSED -still went into office for 8 hours — trying to figure out INHANCE for 2005 -came home and went and visited Dave & Marie -took the kids their gifts- didn't stay long -too tired -up @ 11- worked all night long (8.0 hours claimed) 12/27/2005 Laura off. What a day! Ed there all day-we straightened out our differences -then he worked till after 4 -what a mess -home @ 4 -went straight to bed -slept too! My cold really has me down -did talk to Jupe- she was off today -up @ 9 worked till 3 on INHANCE breakdown (5.0 hours claimed) Laura and I busy getting bills out - don't know what to do first -did work on writing forms for Ed to install. Home @ 4 -ate at Eat -n -Park, took a nap then bathed and started on INHANCE breakdown. It will take us forever to get this balanced —went to bed at 3 (6.0 hours claimed) 12/28/2005 Feel like cr ** but still went to work -Ed there again -Laura has attitude -Came home w/ Wendy's and went straight to bed -got up @ 8- called and told Mel everything was going on- started domestic - called it quits @ 1 (4.0 hours claimed) Worked all day on bills and INHANCE -did do all of commercial, public, industrial -told Mel the problems we're having -Marie made us soup -took a nap till 6 -then started on domestic - called it quits @three - Bill is so angry (9.0 hours claimed) 12/29/2005 All the loonies out today -had bid opening meeting -mtg packed thinking JoAnne was being hired - JERKS- Rudy called office -going out to eat- tomorrow night -had to change my hair appt. -ate leftovers and to bed -up (a, 10- worked till time to go to work Laura finishing bills while I counted (illegible) -this won't work either -Ed's breakdown will be good once the bugs are out -Jo made me supper from SS to take home -her lasagna was delicious -took a nap -then worked on 2005 domestic till Arrow, 07 -099 Page 25 b. In a sworn statement provided to Attorney Timothy Maatta on June 19, 2007, Arrow stated the following: "Now, I have kept diaries since 1960... Here is 2006 and all of the hours that I worked at home. Here is 2005 and all of the hours that I worked at home" (page 22). "I have it in my diary recorded at home how many hours I worked night after night, weekend after weekend" (page 23). 94. Inconsistencies exist in Arrow's own Togs regarding activities performed and the number of hours claimed as having been worked from home. a. Arrow's 2005 personal calendar /day planner for December26, 2005, through January 1, 2006, and Arrow's 2006 personal calendar /day planner for December 26, 2005, through January 1, 2006, document activities and overtime hours claimed as noted below: Date (6.0 hours claimed) midnight - couldn't sleep so back up @3and worked till it was time to go to work (9.0 hours claimed) Discrepancy Worked Per Day Planner/ of Day's Activities Claimed Per 12/30/05 Worked one -half day -Ed still not done with bills -had hair done @ 2- met Rudy and his friend @ 6- LaTavala -had a fun time - everyone fired up over John Y -I had a call from a credit agency -gave them his cell phone #- worked on domestic till 2:00 - totally exhausted (4.0 hours claimed). Finally got bills out -too tired to go to dinner tonight - called Ken and (illegible) and cancelled -slept till 9- bathed -and worked for five hours. Bill down w/a cold (5.0 hours claimed) December 26, 2005 0.0 12/31/2005 Arr and I did zero till 3:30 -then went to Chiccante's and ate just the two of us -Arr was so handsome (0.0 hours claimed) Went to Evolutions- stopped @ Paneras -then home @ 2- staying home -not going anywhere so we took a nap -ate our food from Olive Garden then started on domestic again -to bed @ 12:30 (8.5 hours claimed @ office) Date Hours Hours Claimed Discrepancy Worked Per Day Planner/ of Day's Activities Claimed Per per 2006 Loci 4.0 2005 Loci December 26, 2005 0.0 8.0 8.0 December 27, 2005 5.0 6.0 1.0 December 28, 2005 4.0 9.0 5.0 December 29, 2005 6.0 9.0 3.0 December 30, 2005 4.0 5.0 1.0 December 31, 2005 0.0 8.5 8.5 Total 19.0 45.5 26.5 Date Overtime Hours Claimed /Paid Per Payroll Processing Sheet Hours Description Worked Per Day Planner/ of Day's Activities 10/01/05 4.0 0.0 /Arr busy getting Jupe's stuff together so I went to Evolutions Arrow, 07 -099 Page 26 b. Arrow's log books note discrepancies of 26.5 hours claimed for the six day period between December 26, 2005, and January 1, 2006, as shown below: 95. From January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005, Arrow was compensated at one and one -half times her regular hourly rate for approximately one hundred sixteen and one -half (116.5) hours of overtime totaling $3,313.26 (gross). a. Arrow's regular hourly rate in 2005 was $18.95 per hour. 1. Arrow's overtime rate in 2005 was $28.44 per hour. 96. Of the 116.5 hours of overtime for which Arrow received payment, a minimum of ten and one -half hours (10.5) totaling $298.62 (gross) was for overtime hours not worked by Arrow: Date Overtime Hours CIairned /Paid Per Payroll 'Processing Sheet Hours Description Worked Per o Day's Activit nner/ myself- Margie and Bob t -Hom e & Arr & !went to Rego 12/12/05 14.5 (7.0 Regular + 7.5 O.T *.) 2.0 /Heard about Fran's sist son being killed in auto accident - flowers off today -Made her a card for her hairdresser - Home -ate suppe -Took a nap -made "Bonus" cards till •midnight -Cash instead of hams. Total 10.5 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 27 a. b. a. b. *Although the time card and actual time sheet notes 7.5 overtime hours, 6.5 are claimed to have been worked by Arrow from her residence on the budget while Arrow's day planner /calendar note 2.0 hours worked. Arrow claimed and received payment for four hours of overtime on Saturday, October 1, 2005. 1. Arrow claimed and received payment for six and one -half hours of overtime worked at home on Monday, December 12, 2005. 1. Arrow's personal calendar /day planner notes no Authority work performed at her home on December 12, 2005. aa. The only reference to the Authority is Arrow's generation of "Bonus" cards for Authority employees. Arrow's regular hourly rate in 2006 was $19.36 per hour from January through June and $21.86 per hour from July through December. Arrow's personal calendar /day planner notes no work performed at the Authority office or at her home on October 1, 2005. 2. Arrow's time card for December 12, 2005, notes time worked as 7:47 a.m. -3:58 p.m. aa. Arrow was paid for seven regular hours and one hour overtime per her time card punches. bb. Actual time earned totals seven regular hours and one -half hour overtime (eight hours minus a one -half hour lunch period). 97. From January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2006, Arrow was compensated at one and one -half times her regular hourly rate for a minimum of one thousand three hundred forty -eight (1,348) hours of overtime totaling approximately $44,200.92 (gross). Arrow's overtime rate in 2006 was $29.04 per hour from January through June and $32.79 per hour from July through December. Arrow received overtime wages in each of her regular bi- weekly payroll check[s] received regarding the 2006 calendar year. 1. Date Overtime Hours Claimed /Paid For Per Payroll Processing Sheet Hours Worked Per Day Planner/ Description of Day's Activities 01/08/06 5.0 0.0 /Did zero - Steelers won -made kielbasa and kraut. 02/26/06 10.0 0.0 /Did absolutely nothing -not even comb hair 03/04/06 5.0 0.0 /Arr. no go -had hair & nails done -love my nails. Arr & I went to Rego's to eat. Brought food home for tomorrow 03/12/06 8.0 0.0 /Zero, in bed all day with Arr and his cold 03/18/06 8.0 Ran to Evolutions myself, home -then Arr and left for Jupes @ 3:00. Cindy's birthday celebration at Monterey Bay. Cindy blacktop and stamps, gag gifts too. 03/19/06 8.0 0.0 /Lazy day -read papers and watched "I Walk The Line," Fluffly was out all day 03/25/06 8.0 0.0 /Left at 9 to Panera for crepes, I loved my hair, stopped @ SS. Picked up Margie, Terry, and Missy-Back Porch then Copacabana -loved it. Talked to Jon, talked to Arr in am. 04/01/06 8.0 0.0 /Left at 12:30 for evolutions, things tense, To (Illegible) with Jen and Heather, Home and did zero 11/11/06 11.0* / # 3.0 /Evolutions noon, had comforter cleaned, ate at egos, credit deposits 3 hours 11/18/06 10.0* 0.0 /Arr and I left for Paneras, then Target, then Gabes, ate at Olive Garden 11/25/06 10.0* / # 6.0 /Up @ 2, worked till 8 on (illegible) stuff, Bill no go with me, still stopped @ Paneras, Pat Bridges p (illegible), Regos Arrow, 07 -099 Page 28 c. Arrow received overtime wages via three additional payroll checks issued solely for hours allegedly worked on Authority business from her home. 1. Arrow received payment for one hundred fifteen (115) hours (check number 1641), one hundred seventeen hours (117) (check number 1749), and one hundred twenty -nine (129) hours (check number 1863) for allegedly working from home in May /June, September, and December 2006 respectively. aa. Although claimed as overtime hours in Arrow's personal calendar /day planner, Arrow received regular wages for the first seventy hours associated with each extra check received. bb. Arrow received overtime wages for the balance of hours paid on each of the three checks received. 98. Of the one thousand three hundred forty -eight (1,348) overtime hours for which Arrow received payment in 2006, a minimum of one hundred thirty -one and one half (131.5) of the hours totaling $4,086.89 (gross) were for hours not worked by Arrow as reflected by her day planner: Date Overtime Hours Claimed /Paid For Per Payroll Processing Sheet Hours Worked Description Per Day Planner/ of Day's Activities 11/26/06 10.0 / # 5.0 /Went to Methodist Church in BV ate Lionwood Steelers bombed, worked from to midnight (illegible) 12/02/06 6.5* 0.0 /Took Kathy (illegible) to Evolutions, she was gorgeous was there for five hours Arr and 1 ate p home 12/09/06 6.5* Saturday 0.0 /Me- color, Arr- haircut, left @ 10:30, Panera, Evolutions, thank yous 12/10/06 5.0* 6:38a-4:31p 0.0 /To church P10:30 then ate Landing, gave lly (illegible), home at and did Eagles zero 12/30/06 12.5* 10.0 0.0 /Blood work at Jefferson, Paneras, Evolutions, Chiccantes, Home Total 131.5 11/26/06 10.0 Date Overtime Hours Claimed Time Punches Card Day Week of Day's Activities Per Calendar Planner /Day 11/11/06 11.0 6:18a -5:07p Saturday Evolutions @ noon, had comforter cleaned, ate at Regos, credit deposits 3 hours 11/18/06 10.0 6:38a-4:31p Saturday Arr and I left for Paneras, then Target, then Gabes, ate at Olive Garden 11/25/06 10.0 6:15a -4:15p Saturday Up @ 2, worked till 8 on (illegible) stuff, Bill no go with me, still stopped @ Paneras, Pat Bridges @ (illegible), Regos 11/26/06 10.0 6:18a -4:19p Sunday Went to Methodist Church in BV, ate Arrow, 07 -099 Page 29 * Time cards note punches in and out on these days # Represents number of hours claimed per time clock, hours noted in Description column represent hours allegedly worked at home at different time of day. a. All entries in the chart above document no work performed per Arrow's entries in her own personal calendar /day planner with the exception of hours allegedly worked on November 11, 2006, November 25, 2006, and November 26, 2006. 1. All instances of work performed (per Arrow's day planner) reference hours allegedly worked by Arrow at her home. aa. None of the hours alleged to have been worked was completed at the Authority office. b. All overtime hours claimed are documented on Arrow's time sheets as hours for which overtime was paid. 99. Arrow's time cards record Arrow punching in and out at the Authority office during the same time that Arrow was involved in personal activities outside of the Authority as documented in her personal calendar /day planner as shown below: Check No. Check Date Pay Period Overtime Hours Paid ! Overtime Hours Not Worked Day's Activities Per Calendar/Day Planner Signature Authority Gross Wages Paid Gross Wages Received For Hours Not Worked 1306 10/07/05 09/18/05- 12.5 4.0 Arrow /Weiss $1,681.90 $113.76 6.5 6:05a- 12:28p 10/01/05 Me- color, Arr- haircut, left @ 10:30, Panera, Evolutions, thank yous 12/10/06 5.0 5:35a- 10:42a Sunday 1437* 12/29/05 12/11/05- 17.0 6.5 Arrow /Sotta 483.48 184.86 12/24/05 1467 01/27/06 01/08/06- 20.0 5.0 Arrow /Weiss 1,895.20 145.20 ** 01/21/06 1520 03/10/06 02/19/06- 28.0 15.0 Arrow /Sotta 2,331.82 ** 435.60 03/04/06 1532 03/20/06 03/05/06- 35.0 16.0 Arrow /Weiss 2,371.60 464.64 03/18/06 1552 04/03/06 03/19/06- 42.0 24.0 Arrow /Weiss 2,574.88 696.96 04/01/06 Date Overtime Hours Claimed Time Punches Card Day of Week Day's Activities Per Calendar/Day Planner @ Lionwood, Steelers bombed, worked from 7 to midnight (illegible) 12/02/06 6.5 9:35a -4:OOp Saturday Took Kathy (illegible) to Evolutions, she was gorgeous, was there for five hours, Arr and I ate (a, home 12/09/06 6.5 6:05a- 12:28p Saturday Me- color, Arr- haircut, left @ 10:30, Panera, Evolutions, thank yous 12/10/06 5.0 5:35a- 10:42a Sunday To church @ 10:30, then ate at Eagles Landing, gave Kelly (illegible), home and did zero 12/30/06 12.5 5:30a- 6:02p* Saturday Blood work at Jefferson, Paneras, Evolutions, Chiccantes, Home Arrow, 07 -099 Page 30 * Minute time specified is approximate due to poor photocopy quality. a. Evolutions is a salon located at 1201 Broughton Road, Pittsburgh, PA 15236. 1. Evolutions typically maintains operating hours of 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays. 2. Drive time from Arrow's residence to Evolutions is approximately forty -to forty -five minutes one -way. 100. Between the dates of October 7, 2005, and January 12, 2007, Arrow received eleven Authority payroll checks totaling $28,778.51 (gross) which specifically included payment for one hundred forty -two (142) overtime hours not worked but claimed by Arrow in 2005 and 2006 totaling $4,385.51 (gross) as shown below: Check No. Check Date Pay Period Overtime Hours Paid Overtime Hours Not Signature Authority Gross Wages Paid Gross Wages Received For Hours Not Worked 1806 11/17/06 10/29/06- 75.0 11.0 Arrow /Weiss 3,989.45 360.69 11/11/06 1833 12/01/06 11/12/06- 59.0 20.0 Arrow /Sotta 3,464.81 655.80 11/25/06 1844 12/06/06 11/26/06- 59.0 23.0 Arrow /Weiss 3,464.81 754.17 12/09/06 1854 12/18/06 12/10/06- 59.0 5.0 Arrow /Weiss 3,464.81 163.95 12/23/06 1881 01/12/07 12/24/06- 45.0 12.5 Sotta /Weiss 3,005.75 409.88 01/06/07 Total 451.5 142.0 $28,728.51 $4,385.51 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 31 * Represents a separate check on which seventeen hours of overtime was paid for the pay period noted. Includes wage increase of $0.41 retroactive to January 1, 2006. a. Arrow signed as an authorized Authority signatory ten of the eleven checks issued which included payment of known fraudulent overtime hours. 101. Of the eleven checks issued which included payment for overtime hours not worked, Arrow received check numbers 1844 and 1854 prior to the actual pay dates. ** a. Check number 1844 was issued for the payroll period spanning the dates of November 26, 2006, through December 9, 2006. 1. Arrow instructed Snyder to issue Arrow's payroll check for payroll period November 26, 2006, through December 9, 2006, on December 6, 2006, three days prior to the actual pay date. aa. Arrow received payment for fourteen hours of regular salary which Arrow had not yet worked as well as twelve and one -half hours of overtime which Arrow had not yet worked. 1. Six and one -half of the overtime hours for which Arrow was paid early were hours claimed on December 9, 2006, which were determined to be for hours not worked. b. Check number 1854 was issued for the payroll period spanning the dates of December 10, 2006, through December 23, 2006. 1. Arrow instructed Snyder to issue Arrow's payroll check for payroll period December 10, 2006, through December 23, 2006, on Meeting Arrow Check Arrow's Final Date Present Number Vote Vote 11/29/2005 Yes 1306 Yes 7 -0 01/31/2006 Yes 1437 Yes 7 -0 02/28/2006 Yes 1467 Yes 7 -0 04/25/2006 Yes 1520 Yes 7 -0 04/25/2006 Yes 1532 Yes 7 -0 05/30/2006 No 1552 N/A 7 -0 12/19/2006 Yes 1806 Yes 6 -0 02/27/2007 Yes 1833 No 5 -1 02/27/2007 Yes 1844 No 5 -1 02/27/2007 Yes 1854 No 5 -1 03/27/2007 No 1881 N/A 6 -0 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 32 December 18, 2006, five days prior to the actual pay date. aa. Arrow received payment for twenty -eight hours of regular salary which Arrow had not yet worked as well as sixteen hours of overtime which Arrow had not yet worked. 1. Five of the overtime hours for which Arrow was paid early were hours claimed on December 10, 2006, which were not worked. 102. Arrow maintains a personal, joint checking account with her spouse (William Arrow) at National City Bank. a. Check numbers 1437, 1520, 1532, 1844, and 1854 were cashed. b. Check numbers 1306, 1467, 1552, 1806, 1833, and 1881 were deposited into Arrow's personal account. 1. All checks deposited with the exception of check numbers 1552 and 1881 had a portion of the deposit amount withdrawn as cash immediately upon negotiation. 103. Arrow was present and participated in votes to approve the Treasurer's Reports including bill lists on which payroll checks including fraudulent overtime wages paid to Arrow were documented as shown in the chart below: a. Arrow voted to approve the Treasurer's Reports on five of eight instances. 104. Arrow realized a private pecuniary gain of $4,385.51 when she submitted and received payment for overtime hours as the Authority office manager that she did not work, when she voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists on which payment[s] for bogus overtime hours were documented, and when she signed checks as an authorized Authority signatory which included overtime hours that she did not work. a. Arrow received payment for ten and one -half hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2005 calendar year totaling $298.62. b. Arrow received payment for one hundred thirty -one and one -half (131.5) hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2006 calendar year totaling $4,086.89. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 33 THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ARROW'S RECEIPT OF A SALARY INCREASE IN EXCESS OF THAT APPROVED BY THE AUTHORITY BOARD AND WHEN ARROW RECEIVED RETROACTIVE WAGES IN THE 2006 CALENDAR YEAR WHICH WERE NOT APPROVED BY THE AUTHORITY BOARD 105. The Authority board is responsible for establishing employee wages and approving wage increases received by Authority employees. a. Prior to January 2005, wage increases provided to plant and office personnel were approved by the Authority board on an intermittent basis. 1. The Authority board had the option of making wage increases retroactive if they so desired. aa. Wage increases made retroactive by the board were specifically noted as such in the minutes. 106. No set schedule of automatic wage increases was in effect at the Authority until plant employees became unionized in 2004. 3403. a. Plant employees unionized under the United Steelworkers Union, Local b. The Union contract was approved by the board at the December 21, 2004, regular Authority meeting. 107. Per the approved Union contract, union employees at the Authority were to receive minimum wage increases of $0.36 per hour effective January 1, 2005, January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2007. a. The Authority board was not required to approve the increases annually as the increases had been pre- approved via ratification of the Union contract. 108. Plant employees Gary Pluto, Edward Chunko, and Michael Latkanich were classified as salaried employees when the Union was formed; the payroll classification of Pluto, Chunko, and Latkanich was changed from salaried to hourly in March and April 2005. a. The change in payroll status occurred via Resolution Numbers 330 (Chunko and Latkanich) and 333 (Pluto) approved by the Board at the March 29, 2005, and April 26, 2005, regular meetings respectively. 109. Authority employees not part of the Union at that time included plant manager Joseph Alvarez, Arrow and Snyder. a. Although not included in the Union, as of January 1, 2005, Arrow and Snyder were required to utilize time clocks located at the Authority offices to document hours worked. 1. Alvarez utilized the time clock upon his hiring in March 2005. b. Arrow considered herself and Snyder to be hourly employees effective January 1, 2005, although no specific Resolution officially noting the change in payroll status was presented to or approved by the board. 1. Arrow indicated that she was paid hourly in a sworn statement taken on June 19, 2007, in the office of Attorney Timothy Maatta. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 34 2006. c. No automatic wage increase was in effect for Arrow or Snyder as office employees. 1. Alvarez received increases as set forth in his individual contract as plant manager with the Authority. 110. Arrow received various wage increases as the office manager from 2002 through 2006 which were approved by the Authority Board. a. The Authority board approved a $5,000.00 salary increase for Arrow at the December 17, 2002, regular board meeting to reflect increased duties and increased computer responsibilities. 1. The vote to approve the increase passed via a 6 -0 vote. aa. Arrow was not present at the December 17, 2002, meeting. b. The Authority board approved a $0.50 per hour increase for Arrow and Snyder at the February 10, 2004, special Authority meeting. 1. Minutes specifically note the increase to be retroactive to January 1St 2. No specific vote is documented regarding the motion. 3. Minutes note Arrow's presence at the meeting. c. At the January 25, 2005, regular meeting, the Authority board approved full time office personnel to receive the same salary increase as plant personnel. 1. Minutes note Arrow's presence at the meeting. 2. Minutes document the motion passing unanimously with no abstention by Arrow. 3. Plant personnel received an increase of $0.36 per hour on January 1, 2005, per the Union contract. d. The Authority board approved a $2.50 per hour increase for Arrow at the June 27, 2006, regular meeting. 1. The minutes specifically note the increase being effective July 1, 2. The vote to approve the increase passed via a 6 -0 vote. aa. Arrow was not present at the June 27, 2006, meeting. 111. Although the Authority board approved full time office personnel to receive the same salary increase as plant personnel at the January 25, 2005, regular meeting, Arrow, in her public position, increased her hourly rate by over three times the amount received by plant employees in 2005. a. Plant employees received an hourly increase of $0.36 per hour as mandated by the Union contract. b. Arrow increased her hourly rate by $1.10 per hour. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 35 1 Arrow's use of her public position raised her rate of pay in 2004 to $17.85 per hour. 2. Arrows raised her rate of pay in 2005 to $18.95 per hour. aa. Although Arrow increased her rate of pay by $1.10 in 2005, Arrow paid herself wages retroactive from January 7, 2005, to January 1, 2005, for thirty -five hours at an increase of $0.82 per hour. She then increased her pay rate by $1.10 for all subsequent pay periods in 2005. 112. Arrow authorized herself a wage increase during the 2005 calendar year in excess of that approved by the Authority board which resulted in Arrow's receipt of compensation which she was not entitled to receive totaling $1,516.82 (gross). a. Arrow received payment for thirty -five retroactive (35) hours representative of the first calendar week in January 2005 at an amount of $0.46 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board ($0.82 - $0.36 = $0.46) totaling $16.10 (gross). b. Arrow received payment for one thousand seven hundred eighty -five (1,785) regular hours in calendar year 2005 at an amount of $0.74 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board ($1.10 - $0.36 = $0.74) totaling $1,320.90 (gross). c. Arrow received payment for one hundred six (106) overtime hours in calendar year 2005 at an amount of $1.11 ($0.74 x 1.5 = $1.11) per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $117.66 (gross). d. Arrow received payment for eighty -four (84) vacation hours in calendar year 2005 at an amount of $0.74 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $62.16 (gross). 113. As a result of the approval granted at the January 25, 2005, meeting, office personnel were to automatically receive the same hourly wage increase as did plant employees in 2006. a. Plant employees received an hourly increase of $0.36 per hour in 2006 as mandated by the Union contract. b. Arrow increased her hourly rate by approximately $0.41 per hour. 1. Arrow set her rate of pay in 2005 at $18.95 per hour when it should have been $18.21 /hour. 2. Arrow set her rate of pay in 2006 at $19.36 per hour for the first half of the calendar year. aa. Arrow received a merit increase from the Authority board to be effective July 1, 2006, which increased Arrow's hourly rate to $21.86 per hour but the actual rate should have been $20.71* per hour based on increases actually approved by the Board. *[It would appear that the parties are treating the $0.36 per hour raise in January 2006 as becoming part of the merit increase effective July 1, 2006; otherwise, the correct hourly Arrow, 07 -099 Page 36 rate as of July 1, 2006, would have been $21.07.) c. Arrow received an extra $0.05 per hour increase over that which she was entitled to receive for 2006 for the first six months of 2006. 114. As a result of issuing herself wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority board in 2005 ($0.74 per hour) and 2006 ($0.05 per hour), Arrow received wages in 2006 at a rate of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board which resulted in Arrow's receipt of unapproved compensation totaling $3,070.70 (gross). a. Arrow received payment for one thousand eight hundred twenty (1,820) regular hours in calendar year 2006 at an amount of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $1,437.80 (gross). 1. $0.79 /hour determined by adding the $0.74 unapproved in 2005 and the additional $0.05 unapproved in 2006. b. Arrow received payment for one thousand two hundred sixteen and one -half (1,216.5) overtime hours in calendar year 2006 at an amount of $1.19 ($0.79 x 1.5 = $1.19) per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $1,447.64 (gross). c. Arrow received payment for twenty -four and one -half (24.5) vacation hours in calendar year 2006 at an amount of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $19.36 (gross). d. Arrow received payment for an additional two hundred ten (210) regular hours in calendar year 2006 at an amount of $0.74 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board for hours claimed as worked from her home totaling $165.90 (gross). 115. Arrow did not receive a wage increase in 2007 as the Authority office manager. a. Although Arrow did not receive a wage increase in 2007, Arrow continued to receive the $0.79 per hour in excess of that which had been approved by the board in 2005 and 2006. 116. As a result of issuing herself wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority board in 2005 ($0.74 per hour) and 2006 ($0.05 per hour), Arrow received wages in 2007 at a rate of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board which resulted in Arrow's receipt of compensation totaling $787.89 (gross) that she was not entitled to receive. a. Arrow received payment for nine hundred eighty (980) regular hours in calendar year 2007 at an amount of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $774.20 (gross). b. Arrow received payment for eleven and one -half (11.5) overtime hours in calendar year 2007 at an amount of $1.19 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority board totaling $13.69 (gross). 117. Arrow realized a private pecuniary gain of $5,375.41 (gross) by authorizing wage increases for her in 2005 and 2006 in excess of increases approved by the Authority board for those years and by continuing to issue herself the excess wage increase in 2007 as shown below: Descri • tion 2005 2006 2007 Excess Retroactive Payment ',16.10 ',0.00 ',0.00 Excess Payment - Regular Hours $1,320.90 $1,437.80 $774.20 Excess Payment- Overtime Hours $117.66 $1,447.64 $13.69 Excess Payment- Vacation Hours $62.16 $19.36 $0.00 Excess payment - Additional Regular Hours $0.00 $165.90 $0.00 Total $1,516.82 $3,070.70 $787.89 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 37 118. In addition to Arrow's receipt of wages associated with wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority board, Arrow issued herself payment for wages retroactive to January 1, 2006, after being approved for a $2.50 per hour increase at the June 27, 2006, regular Authority meeting. a. Arrow issued herself wages retroactive to January 1, 2006, although minutes of the June 27, 2006, regular meeting specifically document the wage increase to be effective as of July 1, 2006. 1. No future minutes documented any change /amendment that the increase was to be retroactive to January 15, 2006. 119. Arrow received check number 1649 dated June 28, 2006, in the amount of $4,315.63 (gross) from the Authority's Payroll Account at National City Bank as payment retroactive to January 1, 2006, for the $2.50 per hour increase approved at the June 27, 2006, regular Authority meeting. a. Arrow calculated the increase as a $4,900.00 increase over twenty -six pay periods ($188.46 per pay period) multiplied by thirteen pay periods she already worked in 2006 for a total of $2,449.98 rounded to $2,450.00. 1. Arrow incorrectly calculated the increase of $2.50 per hour over the year as $4,900.00. aa. The actual increase over one year totals $4,550.00 (35 hours per week multiplied by $2.50 per hour multiplied by 52 weeks equals $4,550.00). b. Arrow also calculated retroactive wages due to her regarding overtime hours claimed and paid for from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, as 497.5 overtime hours worked /paid for multiplied by $3.75 per hour (Arrow's $2.50 increase at one and one -half times normal value) for a total of $1,865.63. 120. Arrow received no express permission from the Authority board authorizing the increase granted at the June 27, 2006, regular Authority meeting to be made retroactive to January 1, 2006. a. Arrow without authorization from the Authority board used her position to approve the $2.50 /hour pay raise retroactive to January 1, 2006. 121. Arrow maintains a personal, joint checking account with her spouse (William Arrow) at National City Bank. a. Check number 1649 was cashed upon negotiation. 122. Check number 1649 appeared on the bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the July 25, 2006, regular Authority meeting for approval. Descri • tion Amount 2005 Excess Payment (Total) ',1,516.82 2006 Excess Payment (Total) $3,070.70 2007 Excess Payment (Total) $787.89 Retroactive Wages $4,315.63 Total $9,691.04 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 38 a. Arrow was present at the meeting. 1. Arrow participated in the vote to approve the Treasurer's report submitted. b. Check number 1649 is documented on the bill list in the Treasurer's Report as having been issued on June 30, 2006. 1. The actual date of issue and negotiation was June 28, 2006. 123. Arrow signed check number 1649 issued to her for retroactive regular and overtime wages as an authorized signatory for the Authority. a. Weiss's signature was the second signature authorizing the check. 1. Weiss's signature was affixed via facsimile stamp. 124. Arrow received a private pecuniary gain of at least $4,315.63 (gross) when she issued herself retroactive wages as the office manager for all hours paid dating back to January 1, 2006, in association with an increase approved at the June 27, 2006, regular Authority meeting, when she signed the check as an authorized Authority signatory, and when she voted to approve the bill list on which the check was documented. a. Arrow approved the retroactive payment for herself without any board approval. 125. Arrow realized a private pecuniary gain of at least $9,691.04 (gross) as a result of issuing herself checks from the Authority payroll account which included payment of wages in excess of those approved by the Authority board and when she authorized her receipt of a wage increase retroactive to January 1, 2006, which was not approved by the Authority board as shown below: THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT ARROW RECEIVED OVERTIME WAGES FOR HOURS WORKED TOTALING LESS THAN FORTY IN ONE WORKWEEK. 126. The Authority has maintained a Personnel and Policy Manual for the purpose of providing information on Authority operating policies since at least January 28, 2003. a. The most recent amendment to the Manual occurred in October 2005. 127. The Authority's Personnel and Policy Manual sets forth specific operating policies regarding overtime and compensatory time as noted in Section 2.4. a. The policy specifies the Authority's adherence to Federal and State wage hour regulations regarding overtime. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 39 b. The policy specifies that non - exempt regular full -time employees are entitled to receive one and one -half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in any workweek. 128. Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act (34 Pa. Code § 231.1 et seq.) provides specific definitions for words and phrases as utilized in the context of the Minimum Wage Act. a. Section 231.1. (34 Pa. Code § 231.1) defines "Week" as, "a period of seven days starting on any day selected by the employer." 1. The workweek for the Authority begins on Sunday and expires on Saturday. 129. Sections 231.41. and 231.42. of the Minimum Wage Act (34 Pa. Code §§ 231.41 and 231.42) address overtime rates and the meaning of workweek as applicable under the Act. a. Section 231.41 indicates that, among other information, employees shall be paid overtime not less than one and one -half times the employee's regular rate of pay for all hours in excess of forty hours in a workweek. b. Section 231.42 indicates that the term workweek shall mean a period of seven consecutive days starting on any day selected by the employer and that overtime shall be compensated on a workweek basis regardless of whether the employee is compensated on an hourly wage, monthly salary, piece rate or other basis. 130. Although an administrative employee for the Authority as the office manager, Arrow was considered to be a "Non- Exempt Employee." a. As a Non - Exempt Employee, Arrow was eligible to receive overtime wages for any hours worked over forty in one workweek. 131. Full -time office employees at the Authority were scheduled Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. -4:00 p.m., totaling a thirty -five hour workweek. a. Per the Authority Personnel and Policy Procedures Manual and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, office employees were not eligible for overtime until over forty hours were worked over a seven consecutive day workweek. 1. Authority personnel were not entitled to overtime wages for hours worked between thirty -five and forty hours in one workweek. 132. Although not permitted to receive overtime wages until over forty hours were worked in one consecutive seven day workweek, Arrow routinely authorized and received payment at her overtime rate for hours worked between thirty -five and forty hours in one workweek. a. Arrow was eligible for payment only at her regular hourly rate for hours worked between thirty -five and forty hours in one workweek. 133. From approximately June 2005 through January 2007, Arrow was paid overtime wages for three hundred (300) hours totaling $3,052.91 (gross) for hours which were not worked beyond forty hours in one consecutive seven day workweek as Check Number Check Date Period Ending Date Overtime Hours Paid Overtime Paid for Less Than 40 Hours Worked Hours 1174 7/01/05 6/25/05 3.0 3.0 1190 7/15/05 7/9/05 9.5 9.5 1212 7/29/05 7/23/05 7.5 6.5 1227 8/12/05 8/6/05 15.0 10.0 1243 8/26/05 8/20/05 9.5 6.5 1266 9/09/05 9/3/05 8.5 7.0 1282 9/23/05 9/17/05 19.5 10.0 1306 10/07/05 10/01/05 12.5 10.0 1325 10/21/05 10/15/05 8.5 8.5 1349 11/04/05 10/29/05 0.5 0.5 1364 11/18/05 11/12/05 1.5 1.5 1385 12/02/05 11/26/05 2.0 2.0 1437 12/29/05 12/24/05 17.0 11.0 1458 1/13/2006 1/7/2006 20.0 7.0 1467 1/27/2006 1/21/2006 20.0 10.0 1486 2/10/2006 2/4/2006 20.5 7.0 1499 2/24/2006 2/18/2006 20.0 6.0 1520 3/10/2006 3/4/2006 28.0 10.0 1532 3/20/2006 3/18/2006 35.0 10.0 1552 4/3/2006 4/1/2006 42.0 10.0 1564 4/13/2006 4/15/2006 42.0 10.0 1587 5/1/2006 4/29/2006 45.0 3.0 1599 5/19/2006 5/13/2006 45.0 3.5 1612 5/26/2006 5/27/2006 45.0 3.5 1629 6/12/2006 6/10/2006 45.0 0.0 1640 6/19/2006 6/24/2006 45.0 1.5 1662 7/13/2006 7/8/2006 45.0 7.0 1671 7/19/2006 7/22/2006 47.0 10.0 1693 8/2/2006 8/5/2006 47.0 8.5 1701 8/14/2006 8/19/2006 47.0 10.0 1725 8/31/2006 9/2/2006 47.0 10.0 1737 9/11/2006 9/16/2006 47.0 7.0 1751 10/6/2006 9/30/2006 47.0 10.0 1769 10/20/2006 10/14/2006 67.0 10.0 1788 10/28/2006 10/28/2006 67.0 10.0 1806 11/17/2006 11/11/2006 75.0 10.0 1833 12/1/2006 11/25/2006 59.0 10.0 1844 12/6/2006 12/9/2006 59.0 10.0 1854 12/18/2006 12/23/2006 59.0 10.0 1881 1/12/2007 1/6/2007 45.0 10.0 Total 1,325.0 300.0 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 40 shown below: a. Arrow received payment for eighty -eight hours not worked over forty at her overtime rate of $28.44 per hour instead of her regular rate of $18.95 per hour for an overpayment of $835.12 (gross) in 2005. 1. Arrow received $2,502.72 in overtime wages ($28.44 X 88.0 = $2,502.72). Arrow, 07 -099 Page 41 2. Arrow was eligible to receive only $1,668.48 in regular wages ($18.95 X 88.0 = $1,667.60). b. Arrow received payment for two hundred twelve hours not worked over forty at her overtime rate of $29.04 per hour from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, and at her overtime rate of $32.79 per hour from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007, instead of her regular rates of $19.36 per hour and $21.86 per hour respectfully for an overpayment of $2,217.79 (gross) in 2006 and the first pay period in 2007. 1, Arrow received $2,308.68 in overtime wages from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006 ($29.04 X 79.5) and $4,344.68 in overtime wages from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007 ($32.79 X 132.5) totaling $6,653.36. 2. Arrow was eligible to receive only $1,539.12 ($19.36 X 79.5) in regular wages from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, and $2,896.45 ($21.86 X 132.5) in regular wages from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007, totaling $4,435.57. 134. Arrow's private pecuniary gain associated with overtime wages received for hours totaling less than forty in one workweek totals $2,936.78 (gross) when wages received by Arrow in excess of those approved by the Authority board are deducted from the equation. a. Arrow received payment for eighty -eight (88) hours not worked over forty at her board approved overtime rate of $27.32 per hour instead of her board approved regular rate of $18.21 per hour for an overpayment of $801.68 (gross) in 2005 when excess wages not approved are removed from the equation. 1. Arrow received $2,404.16 in overtime wages ($27.32 X 88.0 = $2,404.16). 2. Arrow was eligible to receive only $1,602.48 in regular wages ($18.21 X 88.0 = $1,602.48). b. Arrow received payment for two hundred twelve (212) hours not worked over forty at her board approved overtime rate of $27.86 per hour from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, and at her board approved overtime rate of $31.61 per hour from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007, instead of her board approved regular rates of $18.57 per hour and $21.07 per hour respectfully for an overpayment of $2,135.10 (gross) in 2006 and the first pay period in 2007. 1. Arrow received $2,214.87 in overtime wages from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006 ($27.86 X 79.5) and $4,188.33 in overtime wages from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007 ($31.61 X 132.5) for a total of $6,403.20. 2. Arrow was eligible to receive only $1,476.32 ($18.57 X 79.5) in regular wages from January 1, 2006, through June 30, 2006, and $2,791.78 ($21.07 X 132.5) in regular wages from July 1, 2006, through January 6, 2007, for a total of $4,268.10. c. Wages in excess of those approved by the Authority board ($0.74 per hour Meeting Date Check Date Check Num- ber Arrow Present Arrow's Vote Final Vote Signature Authority Disposition 08/30/2005 7/01/2005 1174 No N/A 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 7/15/2005 1190 No N/A 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 7/29/2005 1212 No N/A 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490 09/27/2005 8/12/2005 1227 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 8/26/2005 1243 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490 10/25/2005 9/09/2005 1266 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Cashed 9/23/2005 1282 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 11/29/2005 10/07/2005 1306 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 10/21/2005 1325 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 12/20/2005 11/04/2005 1349 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 11/18/2005 1364 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 01/31/2006 12/02/2005 1385 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490 12/29/2005 1437 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 02/28/2006 1/13/2006 1458 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 1/27/2006 1467 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 03/28/2006 2/10/2006 1486 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Cashed 2/24/2006 1499 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Deposit X -8490* 04/25/2006 3/10/2006 1520 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Cashed 3/20/2006 1532 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 05/30/2006 4/3/2006 1552 No N/A 5 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490 4/13/2006 1564 No N/A 5 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 06/27/2006 5/1/2006 1587 No N/A 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 5/19/2006 1599 No N/A 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 07/25/2006 5/26/2006 1612 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 6/12/2006 1629 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 6/19/2006 1640 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 08/29/2006 7/13/2006 1662 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Cashed 7/19/2006 1671 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed Arrow, 07 -099 Page 42 in 2005 and $0.79 per hour in 2006 and 2007) regarding overtime paid were previously discussed. 1. Excess wages not approved were removed from the calculation so as to not penalize Arrow twice for wages received in relation to overtime paid. 135. Arrow participated as a member of the Authority board in approving Treasurer's Reports in which illegitimate overtime wages were included in payroll checks issued to Arrow as documented in applicable Treasurer's Reports as shown below: Meeting Date Check Date Check Num- ber Arrow Present Arrow's Vote Final Vote Signature Authority Disposition 09/26/2006 8/2/2006 1693 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Sotta Cashed 8/14/2006 1701 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 10/31/2006 8/31/2006 1725 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 9/11/2006 1737 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 11/28/2006 10/6/2006 1751 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 10/20/2006 1769 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 10/28/2006 1788 Yes Yes 6 -0 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 12/19/2006 11/17/2006 1806 Yes Yes 7 -0 Arrow /Weiss Deposit X -8490* 01/30/2007 12/1/2006 1833 Yes N/A Not App- roved N/A N/A 12/6/2006 1844 Yes N/A Not App- roved N/A N/A 12/18/2006 1854 Yes N/A Not App- roved N/A N/A 02/27/2007 12/1/2006 1833 Yes No 5 -1 Arrow /Sotta Deposit X -8490* 12/6/2006 1844 Yes No 5 -1 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 12/18/2006 1854 Yes No 5 -1 Arrow /Weiss Cashed 03/27/2007 1/12/2007 1881 No N/A 6 -0 Sotta /Weiss Deposit X -8490 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 43 *Check deposited with portion immediately withdrawn. a. Arrow was present at sixteen of twenty Authority meetings and voted to approve bill lists submitted with Treasurer's Reports on fourteen occasions which documented Arrow's receipt of wages including overtime for hours not worked more than forty in one workweek. 1. The monthly Treasurer's Report and bill list was not approved at the January 30, 2007, Authority meeting. aa. The Authority board voted to approve the corrected Treasurer's Report for January 2007 at the February 27, 2007, Authority meeting. 1. The motion to approve the corrected Treasurer's Report passed 5 -1 at the February 27, 2007, meeting with Arrow objecting. b. Arrow, in her position of Authority Secretary, signed as an authorized Authority signatory on thirty -nine of forty checks she received as the office manager which included overtime wages paid for hours worked totaling less than forty in one workweek. Check Issue - Negotiation Payroll Period Number of Number Date Ending Date Days Issued Early 1564 04/13/2006 04/15/2006 2 1612 05/26/2006 05/27/2006 1 1640 06/19/2006 06/24/2006 5 1671 07/19/2006 07/22/2006 3 1693 08/02/2006- 08/03/2006 08/05/2006 3 1701 08/14/2006 08/19/2006 5 1725 08/31/2006 09/02/2006 2 1737 09/11/2006 09/16/2006 5 1844 12/06/2006 12/09/2006 3 1854 12/18/2006 12/23/2006 5 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 44 c. Seventeen of the forty checks received were deposited (either wholly or partially) into Arrow's personal checking account at National City Bank (Account No. X -8490) while the remaining twenty -three checks were cashed. 136. Of the twenty -six payroll checks Arrow received in 2006, at least ten were issued and negotiated by Arrow or at Arrow's instruction prior to the end of the payroll period for which issued as shown below: a. Payroll checks issued prior to the end of the payroll period were processed by Arrow or by Snyder at Arrow's direction. b. Arrow received payment for regular and overtime hours not yet worked via accepting ten regular payroll checks prior to the end of the applicable payroll period. 137. Arrow realized a private pecuniary gain of $2,936.78 (gross) as a result of paying herself overtime wages at one and one -half her regular hourly rate as the office manager for hours not in excess of forty in one workweek; voting to approve Treasurer's Reports in which said wages were documented on monthly Authority bill lists, and signing checks received as an authorized Authority signatory. 138. On January 12, 2007, the Authority board held an Executive Session at Ramsier's office. a. The purpose of the Executive Session was to discuss concerns regarding payroll received by office personnel (Arrow and Snyder) during the 2006 calendar year. b. Arrow was not invited to attend the Executive Session. 139. On January 19, 2007, the Authority board held a Special Meeting regarding the sole purpose of investigation of personnel matters. a. A motion was made and approved at the meeting via a 4 -0 -1 vote to hire Attorney Timothy Maatta to conduct the investigation. 1. Board member Michael Zadrozny abstained from the vote. b. Arrow was not present at the meeting. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 45 c. The specific topic of investigation was not disclosed at the meeting. 140. Maatta's investigation began on or about February 2007 and was completed near or at the end of June 2007. a. Maatta's primary purpose was to investigate payroll concerns associated with Arrow and Snyder in their capacities as employees with the Authority. b. Maatta had other related assignments as well, including review of computer services performed by and amounts paid to Barnes, insurance coverage concerns related to ex- Authority employee Michael Latkanich, and board member neglect of duty. 141. Maatta independently retained Savarno to conduct a payroll audit of the Authority for calendar year 2006 to include particular attention to payroll records for Arrow and Snyder. a. Savarno was the appointed Authority auditor at the time of the payroll audit. b. Maatta incorporated Savarno's findings into the investigative report. 142. Prior to the issuance of Maatta's report, Arrow was suspended from her employment with the Authority on two occasions in 2007. a. Arrow was suspended for a period of three days commencing on April 10, 2007. 1. Arrow was suspended for eleven specific issues as presented in correspondence to Arrow dated April 9, 2007. 2. Arrow was advised in the correspondence that additional offenses would result in further discipline, up to and including immediate termination of her employment. 3. No specific vote approving Arrow's suspension could be located in Authority minutes for Arrow's suspension in April 2007. b. Arrow was suspended for an additional period of ten days commencing on July 19, 2007. 1. Arrow was suspended for six specific issues as presented in correspondence to Arrow dated July 19, 2007. 2. Arrow's ten day suspension was approved via a 4 -1 vote at the July 18, 2008, Special Meeting of the Authority board. aa. Arrow was not present at the meeting. bb. Sotta cast the dissenting vote. 143. Arrow was terminated from her employment position of Authority office manager prior to the expiration of her second suspension. a. Arrow was terminated via a 4 -0 -1 vote at the July 31, 2007, Authority regular meeting. 1. Sotta abstained from the vote. Description Amount Payment of Unavailable Vacation Hours 10,093.98 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 46 2. Arrow was not present at the meeting. b. Arrow's termination was based on her disciplinary record and Maatta's investigative report. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT ARROW FAILED TO FILE A STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007 IN 2008. 144. Statement of Financial Interests filing requirements for public officials and public employees are mandated by Section 1104 of the State Ethics Act. a. Arrow, as a public official of the Authority, was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1 annually in her position as a member of the Authority board. 145. Arrow was aware of the requirement to file Statements of Financial Interests in her position as a member of the Authority board. a. Arrow had completed SFIs on file at the Authority Office for calendar years 2002 through 2006. 146. Arrow's SFIs on file at the Authority were reviewed on December 10, 2007, and on November 17, 2008. a. The initial review on December 10, 2007, revealed SFIs filed by Arrow for calendar years 2002 through 2006. b. The subsequent review revealed no SFI on file for Arrow for the 2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008. 147. Section 1104(a) of the State Ethics Act sets forth that public officials are to file an SFI with the governing authority of the political subdivision within which appointed or elected no later that May 1 of each year that the individual holds such a position and of the year after the individual leaves such a position. a. Arrow served as an Authority board member until resigning effective July 31, 2007. b. Arrow was required to file an SFI with the Authority by May 1, 2008, for calendar year 2007. 148. Arrow, in her capacity as a member of the Authority board, realized a minimum private pecuniary gain of $27,107.31 as a result of voting to approve bill lists on which payment to Arrow was documented for her position of Authority Office manager which included payment for vacation hours not available, payment of overtime for hours not actually worked, payment of wages including salary increases in excess of that approved by the Authority board, payment of retroactive wages not approved by the Authority board, and payment of overtime wages for hours not worked beyond forty in one workweek; when Arrow signed checks issued to her as an authorized Authority signatory which included illegitimate wages; and when Arrow failed to file a Statement of Financial interests for calendar year 2007 as shown below: Description Amount Payment of Fraudulent Overtime Claimed 4,385.51 Payment Regarding Salary Increases Not Approved by the Authority Board. $5,375.41 Payment of Retroactive Wages not Approved by the Authority Board $4,315.63 Payment of Overtime Wages for Hours Worked Less Than Forty in $2,936.78 One Workweek Total $27,107.31 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 47 III. DISCUSSION: As a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority ") Board of Directors ( "Board ") from August 11, 1999, until July 31, 2007, and as Authority Office Manager from approximately January 2002 through July 31, 2007, Respondent Judith Arrow (hereinafter also referred to as "Respondent," "Respondent Arrow," and "Arrow") has been a public official /public employee subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. The allegations are that Arrow violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when she, as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority, used the authority of her public positions for a private pecuniary benefit, including but not limited to approving and receiving payment for unavailable vacation hours, approving and receiving payment for overtime hours not actually worked, approving and receiving a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board, authorizing and receiving overtime wages when not eligible, and authorizing and receiving wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board; when she participated as a Member of the Authority in voting on Treasurer's Reports in which the payments were documented; when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory; and when she failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests ( "SFI ") for calendar year 2007. 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 Arrow, 07 -099 Page 48 having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. 65 Pa. C. S. § 1102. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official /public employee from using the authority of public office /employment or confidential information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public official /public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides that each public official /public employee must file a Statement of Financial Interests for the preceding calendar year, each year that he holds the position and the year after he leaves it. As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein. Background: Respondent Arrow served as a Member of the Authority Board from August 11, 1999, until July 31, 2007. Respondent served as Board Secretary from January 9, 2000, until February 27, 2007. Respondent also served as an employee of the Authority from approximately February 22, 1982, until July 31, 2007. Most recently, Respondent was employed as the Authority Office Manager from approximately January 2002 through July 31, 2007. Respondent was terminated from her employment position as Authority Office Manager on July 31, 2007. Respondent resigned from her position as an Authority Board Member effective July 31, 2007. Signature authority over Authority accounts is maintained by the Authority Board Chairman, Treasurer, and Secretary. Authority checks require two signatures. Facsimile stamps representing the signature of the Board Chairman (Melvin Weiss) and Treasurer (Ronald Sotta) previously existed at the Authority office for use by Authority staff. Respondent had access to and utilized the facsimile stamps. At the Authority Board's regularly scheduled monthly meetings, the Board reviews for approval a Treasurer's Report, which includes a monthly bill list. Payroll issued to each Authority employee is specifically documented on each month's bill list. Overtime wages earned by Authority employees are included within the employees' regular payroll checks. No description is normally present on the monthly bill list to indicate specific overtime hours worked or specific overtime wages received by individual employees. As Office Manager, Respondent presented no specific information in verbal or written form to the Board at Authority meetings documenting overtime hours claimed by administrative employees. The Authority has a Personnel Policy and Procedures Manual ( "Policy Manual "), which the Board approved on January 28, 2003, and later amended on June 30, 2003. Respondent participated in drafting the Policy Manual and also served on a Board Committee responsible for reviewing it. Respondent was completely familiar with the Arrow, 07 -099 Page 49 Policy Manual as a result of typing the document throughout its various amendments. At both the January 28, 2003, and June 30, 2003, Authority Board meetings, Respondent voted to approve the Policy Manual. The Policy Manual was last amended in October 2005. Per the Policy Manual, Authority office employees are considered full -time although scheduled to work only thirty -five hours per week. Regular work hours for administrative personnel are 8:30 a.m. until 4:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except on recognized holidays. Administrative personnel receive a thirty minute unpaid lunch period. The Policy Manual provides that all employees are to be paid for scheduled time only. Overtime requires prior approval by the immediate supervisor. The Authority adheres to Federal and State wage and hour regulations regarding overtime. Overtime provisions do not apply to exempt employees. The Authority's non - exempt regular full -time employees are entitled to receive one and one -half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in any workweek. In 2004 the Authority plant employees became unionized. In early 2005, various plant employees were reclassified from salaried to hourly employees. Since at least January 2005, all Authority employees, including office employees, have been required to punch a time clock to record their attendance each day. From the beginning of January 2005 until the time of her separation from the Authority, Respondent considered herself an hourly employee because she was required to punch a time clock. Respondent considered herself to be an hourly employee even though she was previously classified as a salaried employee and no specific re- classification of her position was approved by the Authority Board. Authority employees earn vacation time, which may not be accumulated from year to year. It is an Authority practice to pay employees near the end of a calendar year for vacation hours not used during the calendar year. The Authority Board does not hold a specific vote to authorize the payment of unused vacation time to Authority employees. Rather, checks for unused vacation time payouts are documented on a monthly bill list presented to the Board for approval with the Treasurer's Report. During Respondent's tenure, the Authority did not provide sick or personal time to employees. It was an Authority practice that salary employees were permitted to leave the Authority plant or office for doctor's appointments, limited personal matters, and the like without claiming the time. The practice did not apply to consecutive days missed. Authority employees who were classified as hourly employees were required to utilize vacation time for any time absent from the Authority during normal scheduled hours in order to receive payment for the hours missed. As Authority Office Manager, Respondent reported to the Authority Board. Respondent's duties as Office Manager included responsibilities for directing the day -to- day operations of the Authority business office; all business aspects of the Authority; employee payroll; and preparation of all necessary data for yearly budgets and yearly audits of the Authority. Payroll for Authority employees was processed by Authority Office Clerk Laura Snyder ( "Snyder ") or by Respondent when Snyder was not available. Respondent was Snyder's immediate supervisor. Respondent routinely signed employee payroll checks as one of the two required authorized signatories for the Authority. Respondent and Snyder were authorized to utilize the Board Chairman's or Treasurer's facsimile name stamps to obtain the required second signature on Authority checks, and they routinely did so. Excess Vacation Payouts: Arrow, 07 -099 Page 50 As noted above, Authority employees are not permitted to accumulate vacation time from year to year, and it is an Authority practice to pay employees near the end of a calendar year for vacation hours that they have not used. As of February 22, 2002, Respondent was entitled to five weeks (25 days /175 hours) of vacation time each year. As Snyder's direct supervisor, Respondent directed Snyder as to the number of unused vacation hours for which she (Respondent) was to be compensated. Respondent used at least 140 hours in vacation in 2003 but did not deduct any hours from the vacation hours she accrued in 2003. Respondent was compensated for these hours by the Authority as unused vacation time. Respondent received $2,429.00 (gross) in payment for 140 excess vacation hours in 2003. Respondent's vacation payout was correct for the 2004 calendar year. The parties have stipulated that commencing in 2005, as a result of considering herself an hourly employee, Respondent was required to use vacation hours for all leave. In 2005 Respondent used at least 91 hours in vacation. However, Respondent deducted only 62 hours from the number of vacation hours she accrued in 2005. Respondent received $549.55 (gross) for 29 excess vacation hours in 2005. In 2006 Respondent used at least 150.5 hours in vacation but did not deduct any hours from the 175 vacation hours she accrued in 2006. In addition, Respondent received payment for 350 vacation hours in 2006 —twice the total number of hours she earned. The parties have stipulated that Respondent received $7,115.43 (gross) in payment for 325.5 excess vacation hours in 2006. Respondent issued or directed Snyder to issue checks from the Authority payroll account representing payment of vacation time Respondent allegedly had not used in 2003, 2005, and 2006. As a result of the use of her public position, Respondent received overpayment for a total of 494.5 such hours in 2003, 2005, and 2006 totaling $10,093.98 (gross). Authority Checks 2075, 1377, and 1803 were issued to Respondent for vacation payouts for 2003, 2005, and 2006 respectively. Respondent signed checks 1377 and 1803 as an authorized signatory for the Authority. Weiss's signature as an authorized signatory was affixed to both of these checks via facsimile stamp. Weiss's and Sotta's signatures appear as authorized signatories on check number 2075. Sotta's signature as an authorized signatory was affixed via facsimile stamp to check number 2075. Checks 2075 and 1803 were included on bill lists presented for approval at the January 27, 2004, and December 19, 2006, regular Authority meetings respectively. Respondent was present and voted affirmatively to approve the Treasurer's Reports at each of these meetings. The bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the January 27, 2004, meeting specifically noted check number 2075 as having been issued to Respondent as a vacation payout. The bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the December 19, 2006, meeting did not indicate that check number 1803 was issued to Respondent as vacation payout. Check number 1377 was not documented on any bill list for approval by the Authority Board. The bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the December 20, 2005, regular Authority Board meeting notes the consecutive issuance of checks 1348 through 1384 with the exception of check number 1377. Check number 1377 is the only Arrow, 07 -099 Page 51 check number missing from the consecutive run of payroll checks on the bill list. The parties have stipulated that Respondent realized a private pecuniary benefit of $10,093.98 (gross) ($2,429.00 + $549.55 + $7,115.43) when she submitted and received payment from the Authority for vacation hours not available to her, voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists that included such payments, and signed, as an authorized Authority signatory, checks that included such payments. Overtime Wages for Hours Not Worked: In October 2006, the Authority Board appointed a new Auditor to perform past due annual audits of the Authority for calendar years 2003, 2004, and 2005. Upon review of available records at the Authority office, it was discovered that the Authority had no computerized billing or general ledger system to utilize as a beginning point for the audit process. This was so despite the fact that in 2002, the Authority Board had approved the purchase of software with a billing program and a general ledger program for financial accounting /management at the Authority administrative office, and Respondent had retained a computer consultant on an ongoing basis to provide services including training on the financial accounting /management software and Quickbooks. Respondent was informed that the required audits could not be initiated until a trial balance or general ledger was prepared to utilize as a beginning point for the audit. Generation of a general ledger required entry of all of the Authority's financial information for each of the audit years into Quickbooks or a similar accounting program. Respondent retained the aforesaid computer consultant to perform the required data entry. Although Respondent did not perform any data entry associated with the computerization of the Authority's financial information, Respondent completed other additional work in 2005 and 2006 associated with the audits, personnel issues, PennVest, and other matters. Respondent claimed overtime for hours at the Authority office beyond her normal work days as well as for hours performing work for the Authority at her home. Respondent maintained a record in a personal calendar /day planner of the hours she claimed to have worked at home on Authority business. Respondent received tacit approval from the Board Chairman to work overtime needed in association with work to be completed. Respondent did not obtain formal approval from the Authority Board for overtime as required by the Policy Manual. Respondent's time cards record Respondent punching in and out at the Authority office during the same time that Respondent was involved in personal activities outside of the Authority as documented in her personal calendar /day planner. Additionally, inconsistencies exist in Respondent's logs regarding the number of hours that she claimed to have worked at home. The parties have stipulated that Respondent received payment for ten and one -half hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2005 calendar year totaling $298.62. The parties have further stipulated that Respondent received payment for 131.5 hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2006 calendar year totaling $4,086.89. Respondent directed Snyder on the amount of overtime hours to include in each payroll and /or extra check received. Between the dates of October 7, 2005, and January 12, 2007, Respondent received eleven Authority payroll checks which included payment for 142 overtime hours not worked but claimed by Respondent in 2005 and 2006 totaling $4,385.51 (gross) as shown in Fact Finding 100. Respondent signed as an authorized Authority signatory ten of the eleven checks issued that included payment of known fraudulent overtime hours. At Respondent's instruction, Snyder issued two of those checks to Respondent prior to the Arrow, 07 -099 Page 52 actual pay dates. From November 29, 2005, through December 19, 2006, Respondent participated in five Board votes to approve Treasurer's Reports that included bill lists with fraudulent overtime wages paid to Respondent as shown in Fact Finding 103. The parties have stipulated that Respondent realized a private pecuniary gain of $4,385.51 ($298.62 + $4,086.89) when she submitted and received payment for overtime hours as the Authority Office Manager that she did not work, when she voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists on which payments for bogus overtime hours were documented, and when she signed checks as an authorized Authority signatory which included overtime hours that she did not work. Excess Salary Increases and Unauthorized Retroactive Wages: No set schedule of automatic wage increases was in effect at the Authority until plant employees became unionized in 2004. Per the Union contract approved by the Board on December 21, 2004, Union employees at the Authority were to receive minimum wage increases of $0.36 per hour effective January 1, 2005, January 1, 2006, and January 1, 2007. Respondent and Snyder were not Union employees. At the January 25, 2005, regular meeting, the Authority Board approved full time office personnel to receive the same salary increase as plant personnel. Per the minutes, Respondent participated in the unanimous vote approving the increase. Although the Authority Board approved full time office personnel to receive the same salary increase as plant personnel, Respondent increased her hourly rate by more. First, Respondent paid herself retroactive wages for the first week of January 2005 at an increase of $0.82 per hour. She then increased her pay rate by $1.10 for all subsequent pay periods in 2005, such that her prior rate of $17.85 per hour was increased to $18.95 per hour when it should have been increased to $18.21 per hour. By giving herself the aforesaid unauthorized wage increase, Respondent received unauthorized compensation in 2005 totaling $1,516.82 (gross). In 2006, when plant employees received another hourly increase of $0.36 per hour as mandated by the Union contract, Respondent increased her already inflated hourly rate by approximately $0.41 per hour instead of $0.36 per hour. Respondent set her rate of pay in January 2006 at $19.36 per hour when her rate should have been $18.57 per hour. At the June 27, 2006, meeting of the Authority Board, the Board approved a $2.50 per hour merit increase for Respondent effective July 1, 2006. The minutes specifically note the increase being effective July 1, 2006. With the approval of the $2.50 per hour merit increase, Respondent's already inflated hourly rate was increased to $21.86 per hour. The parties have stipulated that the actual rate should have been $20.71. (It would appear that the parties are treating the $0.36 per hour raise in January 2006 as becoming part of the merit increase effective July 1, 2006; otherwise, the correct hourly rate as of July 1, 2006, would have been $21.07.) As a result of issuing herself the aforesaid wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority Board in 2005 and 2006, Respondent received unauthorized wages in 2006 totaling $3,070.70 (gross). Respondent also received an additional $4,315.63 (gross) of unauthorized wages in 2006 by making the aforesaid $2.50 per hour merit increase retroactive to January 1, 2006. The merit increase as approved by the Board was effective July 1, 2006. Respondent used her position to make it retroactive to January 1, 2006, without authorization from the Authority Board. Respondent received the retroactive wages in Arrow, 07 -099 Page 53 Authority check number 1649 dated June 28, 2006, in the amount of $4,315.63 (gross). Check number 1649 appeared on the bill list presented with the Treasurer's Report at the July 25, 2006, regular Authority meeting for approval. Respondent was present at the meeting and participated in the vote to approve the Treasurer's Report. Respondent also signed check number 1649 as an authorized signatory for the Authority. Weiss's signature was the second signature authorizing the check. Weiss's signature was affixed via facsimile stamp. The parties have stipulated that Respondent did not receive a wage increase in 2007 as the Authority Office Manager. (The Stipulated Findings do not expressly state whether Respondent received the $0.36 per hour increase that would have been received by the Union employees on January 1, 2007.) The parties agree that as a result of issuing herself wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority Board in 2005 and 2006, Respondent received wages in 2007 at a rate of $0.79 per hour in excess of that approved by the Authority Board, which resulted in Respondent's receipt of unauthorized compensation in 2007 totaling $787.89 (gross). The parties have stipulated that Respondent realized a private pecuniary gain of at least $9,691.04 (gross) ($1516.82 + $3,070.70 + $4,315.63 + $787.89) as a result of issuing herself checks from the Authority payroll account which included payment of wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board and when she authorized her receipt of a wage increase retroactive to January 1, 2006, which was not approved by the Authority Board. Overtime Wages Received When Total Hours Worked Were Not More Than 40 for the Workweek: Although Respondent was an administrative employee as Authority Office Manager, she was considered to be a "Non- Exempt Employee." The parties have stipulated that as a Non - Exempt Employee, Respondent was eligible to receive overtime wages for any hours worked over 40 in one workweek. Respondent was not entitled to overtime wages for the first five hours worked beyond her scheduled 35 hours within a workweek. The parties have stipulated that from approximately June 2005 through January 2007, Respondent was paid overtime wages for 300 hours totaling $3,052.91 (gross) where Respondent's hours worked did not total more than 40 hours in one consecutive seven day workweek. The parties have further stipulated that Respondent's private pecuniary gain associated with overtime wages received where Respondent's hours worked did not total more than 40 in one workweek is in the amount of $2,936.78 (gross) when wages received by Respondent in excess of those approved by the Authority board (as discussed above) are deducted from the equation. Excess wages not approved were removed from the calculation so as to not penalize Respondent twice for wages received in relation to overtime paid. On 14 occasions, Respondent voted to approve bill lists submitted with Treasurer's Reports that included overtime to Respondent where Respondent's hours worked did not total more than 40 in one workweek. As Authority Secretary, Respondent signed as an authorized Authority signatory 39 of 40 checks she received as the Office Manager that included overtime wages where Respondent's hours worked did not total more than 40 in one workweek. Respondent realized a private pecuniary gain of $2,936.78 (gross) as a result of paying herself overtime wages at one and one -half her regular hourly rate as the Office Manager where Respondent's hours worked did not total more than 40 in one workweek; Arrow, 07 -099 Page 54 voting to approve Treasurer's Reports in which said wages were documented on monthly Authority bill lists; and signing as an authorized Authority signatory checks including such wages. Failure to Timely File SFI for Calendar Year 2007 Respondent was aware of the requirement to file SFIs in her position as a Member of the Authority Board. Respondent filed SFIs with the Authority for calendar years 2002 through 2006. 2008. Respondent failed to file an SFI with the Authority for calendar year 2007 by May 1, Calculation of Private Pecuniary Gain: The parties have stipulated that Respondent, in her capacity as a Member of the Authority Board, realized a minimum private pecuniary gain of $27,107.31 as a result of the above conduct, calculated as the sum of the following amounts: $10,093.98 (excess vacation payouts) + $4,385.51 (overtime wages for hours not worked) + $9,691.04 (excess salary increases and unauthorized retroactive wages) + $2,936.78 (overtime wages received when total hours worked were not more than 40 for the workweek). Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case. The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations as follows: 3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the above allegations: a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she approved and received payments for unavailable vacation hours; b. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she approved and received payments for overtime hours not actually worked; c. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Arrow, 07 -099 Page 55 Authority of Washington Township, when she approved and received payments for a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board; d. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she approved and received payments for overtime wages for hours not eligible for overtime pay; e. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and as the Office Manager of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she approved and received payments for wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board; f That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she voted on Treasurer's Reports in which payments concerning the aforementioned unauthorized payments were documented; That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township, when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory; and h. That a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1104(a) occurred when Arrow failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2007. 4. Arrow agrees to make payment in the amount of $10,842.92 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. g. 5. Arrow agrees to file Statements of Financial Interests Arrow, 07 -099 Page 56 with Washington Township Municipal Authority, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for calendar year 2007 within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 6. 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 -3. In considering the Consent Agreement, each of the violations recommended by the parties has been established. With regard to excess vacation payouts, Respondent used the authority of her public position as Authority Office Manager when she directed her subordinate, Snyder, as to the number of unused vacation hours for which she (Respondent) was to be compensated. Respondent claimed and received $2,429.00 (gross) in payment for 140 excess vacation hours in 2003. Respondent claimed and received $549.55 (gross) for 29 excess vacation hours in 2005. In addition, Respondent claimed and received payment for 350 vacation hours in 2006 —twice the total number of hours she earned. The parties have stipulated that Respondent received $7,115.43 (gross) in payment for 325.5 excess vacation hours in 2006. Respondent issued or directed Snyder to issue checks from the Authority payroll account representing payment of such vacation time Respondent allegedly had not used in 2003, 2005, and 2006. As a result of the use of her public position, Respondent received overpayment for a total of 494.5 such hours in 2003, 2005, and 2006 totaling $10,093.98 (gross). Respondent used the authority of her public position when she signed as an authorized signatory Authority checks issued to Respondent containing excess vacation pay. Respondent used the authority of her public office as a Board Member when she voted affirmatively to approve Treasurer's Reports with bill lists including checks issued to Respondent containing excess vacation pay. The parties have stipulated that Respondent realized a private pecuniary benefit of $10,093.98 (gross) ($2,429.00 + $549.55 + $7,115.43) when she submitted and received payment from the Authority for vacation hours not available to her, voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists that included such payments, and signed, as an authorized Authority signatory, checks that included such payments. With each element of a violation of Section 1103(a) established, we hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for unavailable vacation hours. Cf., McGraw, Order 1397. Arrow, 07 -099 Page 57 With regard to payments for overtime hours not actually worked, Respondent used the authority of her public position as Authority Office Manager when she claimed and received payment for ten and one -half hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2005 calendar year totaling $298.62, and for 131.5 hours of fraudulent overtime hours in the 2006 calendar year totaling $4,086.89. Respondent used the authority of her public position when she directed Snyder on the amount of overtime hours to include in each payroll and /or extra check received. Between the dates of October 7, 2005, and January 12, 2007, Respondent received eleven Authority payroll checks which included payment for 142 overtime hours not worked but claimed by Respondent in 2005 and 2006 totaling $4,385.51 (gross). Respondent used the authority of her public position when she signed as an authorized Authority signatory ten of the eleven checks issued to her that included payment of known fraudulent overtime hours. Respondent used the authority of her public office as a Board Member when, from November 29, 2005, through December 19, 2006, she participated in five Board votes to approve Treasurer's Reports that included bill lists with fraudulent overtime wages paid to Respondent. The parties have stipulated that Respondent realized a private pecuniary gain of $4,385.51 ($298.62 + $4,086.89) when she submitted and received payment for overtime hours as the Authority Office Manager that she did not work, when she voted as an Authority Board Member to approve bill lists on which payments for bogus overtime hours were documented, and when she signed checks as an authorized Authority signatory which included overtime hours that she did not work. Accordingly, we hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime hours not actually worked. Cf., Holt, Order 1153; Williams, Orders 734 and 734 - R; Forbes, Order 681; Cohen, Order 610 -R (regarding receiving compensation for hours not worked). With regard to the retroactive pay raise not approved by the Board, Respondent used the authority of her public position when she made retroactive to January 1, 2006, the $2.50 per hour merit increase that the Board had made effective July 1, 2006. By making the increase retroactive without Board approval, Respondent received a private pecuniary benefit consisting of $4,315.63 (gross) of unauthorized wages. Respondent used the authority of her public position as an Authority Board Member when she participated in the vote to approve the Treasurer's Report that included the bill list with the Authority check for the aforesaid unauthorized retroactive wages. Respondent also used the authority of her public position when she signed such check as an authorized signatory for the Authority. We hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board. With regard to overtime wages for hours not eligible for overtime pay, each element of the recommended violation has been established. Respondent used the authority of her public position as Authority Office Manager on each occasion that she claimed and received overtime wages when her hours for the workweek did not total more than 40 hours. Respondent realized a private pecuniary gain of $2,936.78 (gross) as a result of Arrow, 07 -099 Page 58 paying herself overtime wages when her hours worked did not total more than 40 in the workweek; using the authority of her public office as an Authority Board Member by voting on 14 occasions to approve Treasurer's Reports in which said wages were documented on monthly Authority bill lists; and signing as an authorized Authority signatory 39 of 40 checks including such wages. We hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime wages for hours not eligible for overtime pay. With regard to Respondent's receipt of wage increases in excess of those approved by the Authority Board, Respondent used the authority of her public position when, in 2005 and 2006, she increased her hourly rate by more than the $0.36 per hour increases the Board had authorized. By giving herself the aforesaid unauthorized wage increases, Respondent received a private pecuniary gain consisting of unauthorized compensation in 2005 in the amount of $1,516.82 (gross); unauthorized compensation in 2006 in the amount of $3,070.70 (gross); and unauthorized compensation in 2007 in the amount of $787.89 (gross). Accordingly, we hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board. We accept the recommendation of the parties and hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she voted on Treasurer's Reports in which payments concerning the aforementioned unauthorized payments were documented. We accept the recommendation of the parties and hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Respondent's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory. We hold that a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Respondent failed to file an SFI for calendar year 2007. In 2007 Respondent served as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority until July 31, 2007. It is clear that Respondent was required to file an SFI for calendar year 2007 by May 1, 2008. Respondent failed to do so. As part of the Consent Agreement, Respondent has agreed to make payment in the amount of $10,842.92 payable to the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and forwarded to this Commission within thirty days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. Respondent has further agreed to file an SFI for calendar year 2007 with the Authority through this Commission within thirty days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth a 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, Respondent is directed to make payment in the amount of $10,842.92 payable to the Municipal Authority of Arrow, 07 -099 Page 59 Washington Township and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30 day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order. To the extent she has not already done so, Respondent is directed to file an SFI for calendar year 2007 with the Authority through 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 the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority ") Board of Directors ( "Board ") from August 11, 1999, until July 31, 2007, and as Authority Office Manager from approximately January 2002 through July 31, 2007, Respondent Judith Arrow ( "Arrow ") has been a public official /public employee subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq. 2. Arrow violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to her use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for unavailable vacation hours. 3. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime hours not actually worked. 4. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board. 5. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime wages for hours not eligible for overtime pay. 6. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board. 7 A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she voted on Treasurer's Reports in which payments concerning the aforementioned unauthorized payments were documented. 8. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory. 9. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred when Arrow failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests ( "SFI ") for calendar year Arrow, 07 -099 Page 60 2007. In Re: Judith Arrow, Respondent File Docket: 07 -099 Date Decided: 9/22/09 Date Mailed: 10/6/09 ORDER NO. 1534 1 Judith Arrow ( "Arrow "), a public official /public employee in her capacities as a Member of the Municipal Authority of Washington Township ( "Authority ") Board of Directors ( "Board ") from August 11, 1999, until July 31, 2007, and Authority Office Manager from approximately January 2002 through July 31, 2007, violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to her use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for unavailable vacation hours. 2. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime hours not actually worked. 3. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for a retroactive pay raise not approved by the Authority Board. 4. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for overtime wages for hours not eligible for overtime pay. 5. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her public positions as a Board Member and Office Manager of the Authority when she approved and received payments for wages in excess of those approved by the Authority Board. 6. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she voted on Treasurer's Reports in which payments concerning the aforementioned unauthorized payments were documented. 7 A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Arrow's use of the authority of her office as a Board Member of the Authority when she signed checks issued to herself as an authorized Authority signatory. 8. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred when Arrow failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests ("SF I") for calendar year 2007. 9. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Arrow is directed to make payment in the amount of $10,842.92 payable to the Municipal Authority of Washington Township and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the Arrow, 07 -099 Page 62 thirtieth (30 day after the mailing date of this Order. 10. To the extent she has not already done so, Arrow is directed to file an SFI for calendar year 2007 with the Authority through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this Order. 11. Compliance with Paragraphs 9 and 10 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