HomeMy WebLinkAbout1550 Payne
In Re: Louis Payne, : File Docket: 08-063
Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1550
: Date Decided: 3/25/10
: Date Mailed: 4/9/10
Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair
John J. Bolger, Vice Chair
Donald M. McCurdy
Raquel K. Bergen
Nicholas A. Colafella
Mark Volk
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 not filed and a hearing was deemed waived.
A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement waiving an evidentiary hearing were
subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The
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.
Payne, 08-063
Page 2
I.ALLEGATIONS:
That Louis Payne, a public official/public employee in his capacity as the Mayor of
East Pittsburgh Borough, Allegheny County, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the
State Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a) and 1104(a), when he used the authority of his
public position for the private pecuniary gain of a member of his immediate family,
including but not limited to recommending to Borough Council the promotion of his
daughter, Lori Payne, to the positions of Sergeant and Police Chief, by scheduling work
hours for his daughter, approving time sheets and approving payroll for his daughter as an
employee of the Borough which included hours not worked; and when he failed to file a
Statement of Financial Interests for the 2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008.
II.FINDINGS:
1. Louis J. Payne has served as the Mayor of East Pittsburgh Borough, Allegheny
County, from January 5, 1998, to the present.
a. Payne held no public office for East Pittsburgh Borough prior to his election
as the Borough Mayor.
2. East Pittsburgh Borough is governed by a five Member Council and Mayor.
a. Council currently holds one legislative meeting per month on the third
Tuesday of each month with a workshop meeting held immediately prior to
the legislative meeting.
1. East Pittsburgh Borough held a separate workshop meeting on the
second Tuesday of each month prior to January 2008.
b. Council holds special meetings as necessary.
c. The current population of East Pittsburgh Borough is composed of
approximately 2,060 residents.
3. Council Members and the Mayor are compensated in the amount of $50.00 per
month for services performed as public officials.
a. Council Members and the Mayor are issued compensation on a quarterly
basis.
b. Council Members and the Mayor are not required to attend Council meetings
in order to receive compensation.
4. Voting at East Pittsburgh Borough Council meetings is primarily conducted via
group aye/nay vote after a motion is made and properly seconded.
a. Roll call votes are utilized for any situations legally requiring such a vote.
b. Any abstentions or objections cast are specifically documented in the
minutes.
5. The individual serving in the position of Mayor for East Pittsburgh Borough does not
routinely participate in votes regarding motions presented at Council meetings.
a. The individual holding the position of Mayor for East Pittsburgh Borough may
vote only if a tie vote occurs among Council Members present.
Payne, 08-063
Page 3
6. Signature authority over Borough accounts is maintained by all Members of Council
and the Borough manager.
a. Borough checks issued require a minimum of two signatures by any
combination of those authorized.
b. The East Pittsburgh Borough Mayor does not maintain signature authority
over Borough accounts.
7. The duties and responsibilities of individuals serving as Mayors for Boroughs within
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania are set forth in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania Borough Code.
a. The duties and responsibilities of the Mayor in relation to Borough Police
Departments are established under Article IX, Powers, Duties, and Rights of
Appointed Officers and Employees, Section 1121, of the Borough Code.
8. Section 1121 of the Borough Code, titled “Appointment, Suspension, Reduction,
Discharge, Powers; Mayor to Have Control,” delineates partial Mayoral duties in
relation to Borough Police Departments.
a. The Mayor is noted as having “full charge and control of the Chief of Police
and the Police Force.”
b. The Mayor is noted as being responsible for directing the time during which,
the place where, and the manner in which the Chief of Police and Police
Force shall perform their duties.
1. Specifically documented under said section is that Council is to
determine the total weekly hours of employment that shall apply to
Policemen.
9. East Pittsburgh Borough provides protection for its residents and their property by
way of maintaining a twenty-four hour per day Police Department.
a. East Pittsburgh Borough Police Department (hereafter EPPD) is a non-civil-
service department.
b. EPPD Officers are not unionized.
c. EPPD Officers are “at-will” employees.
10. EPPD is considered a “part-time” Police Department regarding employment status.
a. The Chief of Police position is the only position currently recognized as a full
time position.
b. Although considered a part-time department, various EPPD Officers
consistently work full time hours (forty hours per week).
11. EPPD experiences consistent turnover in relation to Officers employed.
a. Individuals gaining employment with EPPD routinely utilize the department
as a means to gain experience in order to obtain full time employment
elsewhere.
12. EPPD accepts employment applications on a continuous basis.
Payne, 08-063
Page 4
a. Employment applications for the EPPD may be obtained at the Borough
office, the Police Office, in the mail upon request, hand delivery by Borough
representatives, etc.
b. Completed applications are submitted either directly to the Police Office or to
the Borough Office for subsequent forwarding to the Police Office.
1. Employment applications are currently presented to the Chief of
Police for review once received at the Police Office.
c. Applications received and considered to be of interest are maintained at the
Police Office for future consideration if no vacancy exists at the time of
receipt.
13. Information regarding vacant positions existing within EPPD is not routinely
advertised in public circulars.
a. Information on vacant positions existing within the EPPD is frequently
distributed via word of mouth by Officers or other Borough representatives.
b. EPPD also solicits applications from Police Academy classes held in the
surrounding areas.
14. The hiring process regarding obtaining employment as a Police Officer with the
EPPD prior to approximately April 2008 was as follows:
a. Obtaining, completion, and submission of an application for employment to
the Police Office or Borough Office for subsequent presentation to the Police
Office.
b. Review by the Chief of Police and/or Mayor of applications received.
c. Contact by the Mayor with selected applicants to schedule interviews
regarding the vacancy/vacancies.
d. Conduction of interviews by the Mayor of selected applicants.
1. Additional Borough representatives (i.e. Chief of Police, Council
Members, etc.) occasionally participated in interviews conducted.
2. Interviews conducted primarily occurred in the shared Chief of
Police/Mayor’s Office in the EPPD Police Station.
e. Ultimate selection of the individual(s) by the Mayor to be presented for
consideration to Council.
f. Presentation and recommendation of candidates for hiring by the Mayor to
Council at public meetings.
1. The Mayor answered any questions posed by Council at the time of
presentation/recommendation.
2. Borough Council has never dismissed or overruled any individuals
presented by Payne for employment with EPPD.
g. Vote by Council Members to hire the individual(s) presented.
Payne, 08-063
Page 5
1. Individuals hired are sworn in as EPPD police officers at a
subsequent meeting.
15. Positions currently available within the EPPD include Probationary Patrol Officer,
Patrol Officer, Sergeant, and Chief of Police.
a. All Officers in probationary status receive the same hourly wage.
b. All Patrol Officers receive the same hourly wage.
c. All but one of the three existing Sergeants receives the same hourly wage.
1. One Sergeant is assigned to each of the three daily shifts (daylight,
afternoon, overnight).
aa. The normal daylight shift Sergeant currently receives $.15 per
hour more than the remaining Sergeants due to length of
service.
16. No specific promotion procedures exist within the EPPD.
a. Opportunities for promotion are not posted for Officers to express interest.
b. No testing procedure is in place within EPPD for individuals considered for
promotion.
c. Actual promotions must be approved via vote by Borough Council.
17. Council bases decisions regarding Officers to be promoted on personal knowledge
and interaction with the Officers, work performance, citizen comments, and
recommendation from the Mayor.
a. Council places trust in the Mayor’s recommendation due to the Mayor’s
oversight of and constant exposure to EPPD Officers.
18. Lori Payne is Payne’s daughter.
a. Both Payne and Lori Payne are lifelong East Pittsburgh Borough residents.
19. Lori Payne is currently employed as the EPPD Chief of Police.
a. Lori Payne has held various positions with the EPPD since May 1999.
1. Lori Payne has held positions of Patrol Officer, Sergeant, and Chief of
Police.
2. Lori Payne has held the position of Code Enforcement Officer in
addition to the other positions held.
b. Lori Payne attended the Indiana University of Pennsylvania’s Municipal
Police Training Academy at Indiana, PA, from approximately August 8, 1998,
through December 16, 1998, in order to obtain certification as a Police
Officer under Act 120, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
1. Lori Payne graduated from the training academy on December 16,
1998.
Payne, 08-063
Page 6
20. Lori Payne was approved for employment as a Police Officer for EPPD via
unanimous vote at the May 9, 1999, regular meeting of Borough Council.
a. Lori Payne was interviewed by Councilmember Dennis Simon.
b. Lori Payne was also specifically appointed as the Borough Code
Enforcement Officer at the May 9, 1999, meeting.
1. Lori Payne’s Waiver of Training application pursuant to the
requirements of the Municipal Police Officer’s Education and Training
Act documents Lori Payne’s employment date as May 10, 1999.
c. Louis Payne was the individual responsible for presentation of candidates to
Council for employment consideration at that time.
21. Lori Payne completed various duties as a Patrol Officer for EPPD and Code
Enforcement Officer duties for East Pittsburgh Borough from approximately May 10,
1999, through August 11, 2004.
a. Lori Payne was assigned specific work days and shifts on the posted Police
schedule at various times throughout the noted time period as a Patrol
Officer and/or Code Enforcement Officer.
b. Lori Payne was routinely issued payment for hours worked in excess of
those specifically documented on the posted Police schedules.
c. Louis Payne approved and forwarded payroll sheets to East Pittsburgh
Borough office personnel for forwarding to the Turtle Creek Council of
Governments (COG) for processing which specifically identified the number
of patrol hours approved for payment and the number of code enforcement
hours approved for payment for each EPPD officer, including Lori Payne.
1. Hours specified in each position/capacity were not always accurate.
aa. Louis Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from available
patrol and code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne
in order to have more budget flexibility in available patrol hours
for remaining Officers.
d. Lori Payne’s rate of pay as of August 13, 2004, was $10.00 per hour for both
patrol hours and code enforcement hours.
22. As of August 9, 2004, existing rank positions within the EPPD consisted of two
Sergeant positions and one Chief of Police position.
a. Sergeants employed by the EPPD are considered the supervisors of the shift
to which they are routinely scheduled.
b. There was no Sergeant at that time scheduled to primarily work and
supervise second shift activities.
23. At the August 10, 2004, regular meeting of Borough Council under “New Business,”
Council made the decision to add a third Sergeant position to the EPPD in relation
to supervision of second shift activities.
a. The topic and Lori Payne’s possible promotion to the newly created position
Payne, 08-063
Page 7
was discussed by Payne and all Council Members present.
1. Louis Payne was present at the meeting.
2. Louis Payne participated in the discussion to create the position and
the discussions leading up to Council’s decision to give the position
to Lori Payne.
3. Payne provided information to Council, after being solicited for
comments and information by Members of Council.
b. No additional candidates were considered for the position.
c. No recommendation or opinion was solicited from the Chief of Police at that
time regarding who should be considered for the position.
24. Lori Payne was promoted to the position of Sergeant at the August 10, 2004,
regular East Pittsburgh Borough Council meeting by unanimous vote.
a. Lori Payne’s promotion was to be effective August 12, 2004.
b. Lori Payne’s rate of pay increased $0.60 per hour from $10.00 per hour to
$10.60 per hour as a result of her promotion to Sergeant.
1. Although Lori Payne’s promotion was to be effective August 12, 2004,
Lori Payne’s rate of pay did not increase to $10.60 per hour until
August 14, 2004.
c. Louis Payne did not vote on the motion.
25. Lori Payne completed various duties as a Sergeant for EPPD as well as specific
code enforcement duties for East Pittsburgh Borough from approximately August
12, 2004, through January 14, 2008.
a. Lori Payne was not consistently assigned specific work days and shifts as a
Sergeant and/or Code Enforcement Officer on the posted Police schedule.
26. Lori Payne was routinely issued payment for hours worked not specifically
documented on the posted Police schedules.
a. Of the one hundred seventy-eight (178) Police schedules posted
representing the timeframe of August 14, 2004, through January 14, 2008,
“add code enforcement” or a similar derivative thereof was documented on
approximately one hundred (100) schedules in relation to Lori Payne.
1. The posted schedules did not specify the number of hours which were
to be added or the days on which they were to be worked.
2. Payne and/or Borough Council provided Lori Payne the autonomy to
claim whatever number of hours was necessary in order to complete
her work as the Code Enforcement Officer.
3. Payne and/or Borough Council provided Lori Payne the autonomy to
work the necessary hours when convenient for her.
27. Louis Payne approved and forwarded payroll sheets to East Pittsburgh Borough
office personnel for forwarding to the Turtle Creek Council of Governments (COG)
Payne, 08-063
Page 8
for processing which specifically identified the number of patrol hours approved for
payment and the number of code enforcement hours approved for payment for each
EPPD officer, including Lori Payne.
a. Hours specified in each position/capacity are not necessarily accurate.
1. Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from available patrol and
code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to have
more budget flexibility in available patrol hours for remaining Officers.
28. Lori Payne’s rate of pay as of January 14, 2008, was set at $11.35 per hour for both
patrol hours and code enforcement hours.
a. All Members of the EPPD received a $0.25 per hour raise effective January
14, 2006.
b. All Members of the EPPD received a $0.25 per hour raise effective
December 30, 2006.
c. All Members of the EPPD received a $0.25 per hour raise effective
December 29, 2007.
29. John (a/k/a Jack) Cassidy was employed as the EPPD Chief of Police from
approximately mid-1998 through December 29, 2007.
a. Cassidy was not employed in a full time capacity as the EPPD Chief of
Police.
b. During his tenure as Chief of Police, Cassidy was consistently compensated
for thirty-two hours of work weekly (sixty-four hours per pay period) at an
established hourly wage.
30. In or about mid-December 2007, Payne questioned Cassidy at the EPPD station on
his intentions regarding retirement.
a. Payne and Cassidy had multiple informal discussions throughout 2007
regarding Cassidy’s potential retirement.
b. Cassidy acknowledged at that time that it might be time for him to retire.
1. Cassidy did not present Payne with a specific date at that time.
aa. Cassidy intended to retire by the end of December 2007.
c. Payne and Cassidy discussed potential candidates for consideration from
within the department for the Chief of Police position.
1. Payne acknowledged to Cassidy that Lori Payne would likely be given
the position if she desired it.
31. In or about December 2007 following his discussion with Cassidy, Payne informally
advised Council Members outside of a meeting setting of Cassidy’s intention to
retire in the near future.
a. Payne informally advised Council Members of Cassidy’s decision to retire as
he saw them over the next several days.
Payne, 08-063
Page 9
32. Cassidy’s resignation was effective Saturday, December 29, 2007.
a. A computer generated message announcing Cassidy’s retirement and that
matters normally handled by the Chief of Police were to be directed to Payne
was placed on the EPPD communication log/pass on book.
1. Payne placed a copy of the letter on the communication log/pass on
book and bulletin board above the daily sign-in log.
33. Payne and Lori Payne discussed the vacant Chief of Police position for EPPD after
Cassidy retired on December 29, 2007.
a. At that time, Lori Payne was employed full time with the Allegheny County
Housing Authority (Authority) as a Compliance Investigator.
1. Lori Payne had been employed by the Authority in this full time
capacity since October 3, 2005.
2. Lori Payne earned an hourly rate of $19.35 per hour ($40,248.00
annually) in her position with the Authority as of October 1, 2007, and
received health insurance benefits provided by the Authority in
association with her position.
b. Lori Payne expressed her interest in the position and advised her father that
she would accept the position if offered.
34. At the January 15, 2008, regular meeting of Borough Council, Mayor Payne
announced that Cassidy had retired as part of the Public Safety report.
a. Payne announced that candidates from within the department qualified to
step in to the vacant Chief of Police position were potentially limited to Lori
Payne and Cain.
1. Payne compared Lori Payne and Cain as high and low ends of the
scale for the position regarding qualifications.
aa. Payne described Cain as a good Officer but lacking in overall
qualifications for the Chief of Police position.
bb. Payne described Lori Payne as the best choice for the position
of Chief of Police from the potential candidates.
b. Payne presented to Council that Lori Payne fill the vacant Chief of Police
position at the wage of $18.50 per hour.
35. Options were discussed among Council Members and the Mayor (Payne) at the
January 15, 2008, Council workshop and regular meeting in relation to the vacant
Chief of Police position.
a. Options discussed included the possibility of issuing the title of Acting Chief
to an officer within the EPPD or naming Lori Payne Chief of Police.
1. Naming an Acting Chief position was dismissed.
b. Payne participated in the discussion in relation to Lori Payne’s candidacy for
the Chief of Police position.
Payne, 08-063
Page 10
1. Payne informed Council that Lori Payne was interested in accepting
the position if offered.
36. During the January 15, 2008, meeting, Council opted to offer Lori Payne the
position and calculated a wage for the Chief of Police position.
a. Payne participated in the discussion regarding the potential wage for Lori
Payne as the Chief of Police.
1. Payne presented to Council that a total of $40,000.00 had been
budgeted for the Chief of Police ($25,000.00) and code enforcement
work ($15,000.00) for 2008.
2. Payne also advised Council that the position Lori Payne would be
leaving provided benefits and that the position she would be
accepting did not include benefits.
b. Based on discussions with Payne, Council decided that Lori Payne’s wages
would be based on the following:
1. Regular hourly rate for all hours worked up to and including eighty-
hours per payroll period.
2. Overtime hours for any patrol/code enforcement hours worked above
and beyond eighty hours in one payroll period.
3. Regular hourly rate for any “Administrative” hours worked beyond
eighty hours in one payroll period.
4. The discussions and decision regarding payment of administrative
and overtime hours was a work in progress from approximately mid
January 2008 to May 2008.
d. No benefits or partial payment of benefits received elsewhere was discussed
at the workshop meeting.
e. Council did not seriously consider any other in-house candidates.
37. A motion was subsequently made by William Coles, seconded by Kevin Narey at
the January 15, 2008, Council meeting, to hire Lori Payne as the full time Chief of
Police effective immediately at a wage of $18.50 per hour and $200.00 per month
for benefits.
a. The motion to hire Lori Payne as the full time Chief of Police passed via 4-0
unanimous vote.
b. Lori Payne’s rate of pay increased $7.15 per hour from $11.35 per hour to
$18.50 per hour as a result of her promotion to Chief of Police.
38. Lori Payne has completed various duties as the full time Chief of Police for EPPD
as well as code enforcement duties for East Pittsburgh Borough from approximately
April 5, 2008, through the present.
a. Lori Payne assigned herself specific work days and shifts as the Chief of
Police, including code enforcement duties, on the posted Police schedule
throughout the noted time period.
Payne, 08-063
Page 11
1. Lori Payne assumed the responsibility for generation of EPPD work
schedules after officially beginning as the EPPD Chief of Police on
June 9, 2008.
b. Lori Payne was routinely issued payment for hours worked in excess of
those specifically documented on the posted police schedules.
1. Notes on the posted police schedule in addition to specific days and
shifts assigned to Lori Payne often indicated that Lori Payne was to
add code enforcement hours, meetings, etc.
aa. The posted schedule did not specify the number of hours
which were to be added or the days on which they were to be
worked.
1. Payne and/or Borough Council provided Lori Payne the
autonomy to claim whatever number of hours was
necessary in order to complete her work as the Code
Enforcement Officer.
2. Payne and/or Borough Council provided Lori Payne the
autonomy to work the necessary hours when
convenient for her.
39. Payne, as Mayor, approved and forwarded payroll sheets to East Pittsburgh
Borough office personnel for forwarding to the Turtle Creek Council of Governments
(COG) for processing which specifically identified the number of patrol hours
approved for payment and the number of code enforcement hours approved for
payment for each EPPD Officer.
a. Hours specified in each position/capacity are not necessarily accurate.
1. Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from available patrol and
code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to have
more budget flexibility in available patrol hours for remaining Officers.
40. Prior to 2009, Payne, as the Borough Mayor, was specifically responsible for
generation of budget figures for the Police Department, scheduling of all Police
Officers, and approval and submission of payroll hours to the Borough Clerk for
processing through the Turtle Creek COG during his tenure.
a. Payne was responsible for reviewing yearly department expenses and
comparing those expenses to yearly budget amounts to properly budget for
the subsequent year.
b. Payne was responsible for the generation of work schedules for all Officers
to include specific days worked, specific shifts worked, and the total number
of work hours assigned to each Officer.
1. Payne scheduled Officers based on their availability and the number
of hours desired (if possible).
c. Payne was responsible for compiling the total number of hours worked by
each individual Officer, including Lori Payne, and documenting those hours
on a payroll sheet for processing.
d. Payne routinely provided the payroll sheet to employees in the Borough
Payne, 08-063
Page 12
office for forwarding the Turtle Creek COG for processing and issuance of
Police payroll checks.
41. Lori Payne received multiple wage increases during her tenure with the EPPD as a
result of annual increases or merit increases due from promotions received as
shown below:
Date Range Hourly Reason for Increase Increase
Wage Amt.
10/25/2003 to 01/02/2004 $9.40 Not Applicable N/A
01/03/2004 to 08/13/2004 $10.00 General Department Increase (Effective 01/03/2004) $0.60
08/14/2004 to 01/13/2006 $10.60 Promotion to Sergeant (Effective 08/14/2004) $0.60*
01/14/2006 to 12/29/2006 $10.85 General Department Increase (Effective 01/14/2006) $0.25
12/30/2006 to 12/28/2007 $11.10 General Department Increase (Effective 12/30/2006) $0.25
12/29/2007 to 04/18/2008 $11.35 General Department Increase (Effective 12/29/2007) $0.25
04/19/2008 to 10/31/2008 $18.50 Promotion to Chief (Effective 04/19/2008) $7.15*
a. Lori Payne received payment in the amount of an extra $0.60 for each hour
paid spanning the time frame of August 14, 2004, through August 21, 2009.
1. Lori Payne received payment for 9,883.5 hours spanning the time
frame of August 14, 2004, through August 21, 2009.
2. Lori Payne received an extra $5,930.10 in gross wages received as a
result of the wage increase associated with her promotion to
Sergeant.
b. Lori Payne received payment in the amount of an extra $7.15 for each hour
paid spanning the time frame of April 19, 2008, through August 21, 2009.
1. Lori Payne received payment for 2,932.5 hours spanning the time
frame of August 14, 2009, through August 21, 2009.
2. Lori Payne received an extra $20,967.38 in gross wages received as
a result of the wage increase associated with her promotion to Chief
of Police.
42. Lori Payne was issued one hundred thirty-one payroll checks from the East
Pittsburgh Borough payroll account at The Huntington National Bank (Account
Number XXXXXX30775) covering the time period of August 14, 2004, through
August 21, 2009, totaling $108,723.49.
a. All one hundred thirty-one checks issued to Lori Payne between September
3, 2004, and August 27, 2009, included funds received partially as a result of
wage increases due to Lori Payne’s promotion to Sergeant and Chief of
Police.
Payne, 08-063
Page 13
1. Respondent Payne participated in discussions leading up to Lori
Payne’s promotions, including compensation when Lori Payne was
promoted to Chief of Police.
43. Lori Payne received total payments of $26,897.48 between September 9, 2004, and
August 27, 2009, as a result of wage increases received in association with her
promotion to sergeant and Chief of Police respectfully with the EPPD as shown
below:
Time Frame Promotion Hours Paid* Financial Gain
Value
08/14/04 to 04/18/08 $0.60/hour 6,951.0 $4,170.60 ($0.60 x 6,951.0)
04/19/08 to 10/31/08 $7.15/hour 1,205.0 $8,615.75 ($7.15 x 1,205.0)
04/19/08 to 10/31/08 $0.60/hour 1,205.0 $723.00 ($0.60 x 1,205.0)
11/01/08 to 08/23/09 $7.15/hour 1,727.5 $12,351.63 ($7.15 x 1,727.5)
11/01/08 to 08/23/09 $0.60/hour 1,727.5 $1,036.5 ($0.60 x 1,727.5)
Total $26,897.48
*Includes patrol, code enforcement, and overtime hours
44. Lori Payne was issued an additional thirteen checks from the East Pittsburgh
Borough General Fund account at The Huntington National Bank (Account Number
XXXXXX30762) covering the time period of August 2008 through August 2009
totaling $3,428.99 as reimbursement for partial health insurance premiums.
Check No. Check Payee Amount Description
Date
3935 08/26/08 Lori Payne $1,028.99 Reimbursement for April-August 2008
3962 09/10/08 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for September 2008
4010 10/15/08 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for October 2008
4077 11/12/08 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for November 2008
4120 12/08/08 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for December 2008
4191 01/21/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for January 2009
4254 02/24/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for February 2009
4282 03/10/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for March 2009
4351 04/27/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for April 2009
4383 05/11/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for May 2009
4445 06/22/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for June 2009
4519 07/28/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for July 2009
4578 08/24/09 Lori Payne 200.00 Reimbursement for August 2009
Total $3,428.99
45. In an interview with Commission investigators on October 22, 2009, Payne stated
the following:
a. Lori Payne was the most qualified Officer available in-house for promotion to
Sergeant and subsequent promotion to Chief of Police at the time that the
promotions occurred.
Payne, 08-063
Page 14
b. All Members of Council were familiar with Lori Payne and wanted Lori Payne
to be promoted into the Sergeant and subsequent Chief of Police position.
c. Payne was not in favor of Lori Payne holding the Chief of Police position for
EPPD.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT PAYNE, IN HIS
CAPACITY AS THE MAYOR OF EAST PITTSBURGH BOROUGH, FAILED TO FILE
STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007.
st
46. Payne was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1 annually in
his position as the Mayor of East Pittsburgh Borough.
a. Payne submitted SFIs to the East Pittsburgh Borough Office for calendar
years 2004, 2005, and 2006.
47. A Statement of Financial Interests compliance review conducted at the East
Pittsburgh Borough Municipal Building on October 16, 2008, confirmed that Payne
had no Statement of Financial Interests on file with the Borough for calendar year
2007 at that time.
a. Payne received compensation as the Mayor of East Pittsburgh Borough in
calendar year 2007 although Payne had no Statement of Financial Interests
on file with the Borough.
48. From approximately January 2007 through December 2007, Payne received
compensation from East Pittsburgh Borough as the Borough Mayor in the amount of
$600.00 (gross).
a. Payne received compensation in the amount of $50.00 (gross) per month.
1. Payne received compensation due in quarterly installments.
b. Compensation received by Payne occurred via the issuance of East
Pittsburgh Borough payroll check numbers 2964, 3054, 3169, and 3281.
III.DISCUSSION:
As Mayor of East Pittsburgh Borough (“Borough”), Allegheny County, from January
5, 1998, to the present, Respondent Louis Payne, hereinafter also referred to as
“Respondent,” “Respondent Payne,” and “Payne,” has been a public official subject to the
provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101
et seq.
The allegations are that Payne violated Sections 1103(a) and 1104(a) of the Ethics
Act: (1) when he, as Borough Mayor, used the authority of his public position for the
private pecuniary gain of a member of his immediate family, including but not limited to
recommending to Borough Council the promotion of his daughter, Lori Payne, to the
positions of Sergeant and Police Chief; (2) by scheduling work hours for his daughter,
approving time sheets and approving payroll for his daughter as an employee of the
Borough which included hours not worked; and (3) when he failed to file a Statement of
Financial Interests (“SFI”) for the 2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008.
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
Payne, 08-063
Page 15
(a)Conflict of interest.—
No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of
interest.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a).
The term "conflict of interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest."
Use by a public
official or public employee of the authority of his office or
employment or any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for the private
pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family
or a business with which he or a member of his immediate
family is associated. The term does not include an action
having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the
same degree a class consisting of the general public or a
subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group
which includes the public official or public employee, a
member of his immediate family or a business with which he or
a member of his immediate family is associated.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official/public employee from
using the authority of public office/employment or confidential information received by
holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public official/public
employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a
member of his immediate family is associated.
Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides that each public official/public employee
must file an SFI 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.
The Borough is governed by a five Member Council and Mayor. Respondent Payne
has served as the Borough Mayor from January 5, 1998, to the present. As Mayor, Payne
does not vote except to break a tie vote of Borough Council.
Per the Borough Code, a borough mayor is in charge of the chief of police and
police force. 53 P.S. § 46121. Prior to 2009, Payne, as Borough Mayor, was responsible,
inter alia, for generating budget figures for the Borough Police Department (“EPPD”),
scheduling all Police Officers, compiling the total number of hours worked by each
individual Officer and documenting those hours on a payroll sheet, and approving and
submitting payroll hours to the Borough Clerk for processing through the Turtle Creek
Council of Governments.
Since May 1999, Payne’s daughter, Lori Payne, has been employed in various
positions with the EPPD and has also served as the appointed Borough Code Enforcement
Officer.
Payne, 08-063
Page 16
From approximately May 10, 1999, through August 11, 2004, Lori Payne served as
a Patrol Officer for EPPD and as Borough Code Enforcement Officer. Lori Payne was
assigned specific work days and shifts on posted Police schedules. Lori Payne was
routinely issued payment for hours worked in excess of those specifically documented on
the posted Police schedules. Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from available
patrol and code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to have more
budget flexibility in available patrol hours for remaining Officers.
Promotions within the EPPD must be approved by vote of Borough Council, and
Council’s decisions regarding such promotions are based in part on the Mayor’s
recommendation. At the August 10, 2004, regular meeting of Borough Council, Council
decided to add a third Sergeant position to the EPPD and to promote Lori Payne to that
position effective August 12, 2004. During the August 10, 2004, Council meeting, Payne
participated in the discussion to create the position and the discussions leading up to
Council’s decision to give the position to Lori Payne. Payne provided information to
Council, after being solicited for comments and information by Members of Council. No
additional candidates were considered for the position. No recommendation or opinion
was solicited from John Cassidy (“Cassidy”), the individual then serving as Chief of Police.
Payne did not vote on the motion.
Lori Payne’s rate of pay increased from $10.00 per hour to $10.60 per hour as a
result of her promotion to Sergeant. Lori Payne received an extra $5,930.10 in gross
wages as a result of the wage increase associated with her promotion to Sergeant.
From approximately August 12, 2004, through January 14, 2008, Lori Payne served
as a Sergeant for the EPPD and as Borough Code Enforcement Officer. Lori Payne was
routinely issued payment for hours worked that were not specifically documented on the
posted Police schedules. Payne and/or Borough Council provided Lori Payne the
autonomy to claim whatever number of hours was necessary in order to complete her work
as the Code Enforcement Officer and to work the necessary hours when convenient for
her. Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from available patrol and code
enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to have more budget flexibility in
available patrol hours for remaining Officers.
Following several raises received by all members of the EPPD, Lori Payne’s rate of
pay as of January 14, 2008, was $11.35 per hour for both patrol hours and code
enforcement hours.
Throughout 2007, Payne had multiple informal discussions with then Police Chief
Cassidy regarding Cassidy’s potential retirement. Payne and Cassidy discussed potential
candidates from within the EPPD for the Chief of Police position. Payne acknowledged to
Cassidy that Lori Payne would likely be given the position if she desired it.
In or about December 2007, Payne informally advised Council Members of
Cassidy’s intention to retire in the near future. Cassidy resigned effective December 29,
2007.
Payne and Lori Payne discussed the vacant Chief of Police position for EPPD after
Cassidy retired on December 29, 2007. Lori Payne expressed her interest in the Borough
Chief of Police position and advised her father that she would accept the position if
offered. At that time, Lori Payne had a full time employment position with the Allegheny
County Housing Authority, where she received health insurance benefits and earned
$19.35 per hour ($40,248.00 annually).
At the January 15, 2008, regular meeting of Borough Council, Payne announced
that Cassidy had retired and that candidates from within the EPPD who were qualified to
step in to the vacant Chief of Police position were potentially limited to Lori Payne and an
Payne, 08-063
Page 17
individual referred to in the Stipulated Findings as “Cain.” Payne compared Lori Payne
and Cain as high and low ends of the scale for the position regarding qualifications.
Payne described Cain as a good Officer but lacking in overall qualifications for the Chief of
Police position. Payne described Lori Payne as the best choice for the position of Chief of
Police from the potential candidates. Payne presented to Council that Lori Payne fill the
vacant Chief of Police position at the wage of $18.50 per hour.
At the January 15, 2008, Council workshop and regular meeting, options were
discussed among Council Members and Payne in relation to the vacant Chief of Police
position. Options discussed included the possibility of issuing the title of Acting Chief to an
officer within the EPPD or naming Lori Payne Chief of Police. Naming an Acting Chief
position was dismissed. Payne participated in the discussion in relation to Lori Payne’s
candidacy for the Chief of Police position. Payne informed Council that Lori Payne was
interested in accepting the position if offered. Council did not seriously consider any other
in-house candidates.
During the January 15, 2008, meeting, Council opted to offer Lori Payne the position
and calculated a wage for the Chief of Police position. Payne participated in the
discussion regarding the potential wage for Lori Payne as the Chief of Police. Payne
presented to Council that a total of $40,000.00 had been budgeted for the Chief of Police
($25,000.00) and code enforcement work ($15,000.00) for 2008. Payne also advised
Council that the position Lori Payne would be leaving provided benefits and that the
position she would be accepting did not include benefits.
At the January 15, 2008, Council meeting, Council voted unanimously to hire Lori
Payne as the full time Chief of Police effective immediately at a wage of $18.50 per hour
and $200.00 per month for benefits. Lori Payne’s rate of pay with the EPPD increased
$7.15 per hour from $11.35 per hour to $18.50 per hour as a result of her promotion to
Chief of Police.
Based upon discussions with Payne, Council also established criteria governing the
availability of overtime hours for Lori Payne.
From approximately April 5, 2008, through the present, Lori Payne has served as
the full time Chief of Police for the EPPD and as Borough Code Enforcement Officer. For
hours worked from August 14, 2009, through August 21, 2009, Lori Payne received an
extra $20,967.38 in gross wages as a result of the wage increase associated with her
promotion to Chief of Police. Lori Payne assigned herself specific work days and shifts on
the posted Police schedule. Lori Payne was routinely issued payment for hours worked in
excess of those specifically documented on the posted Police schedules. Payne and/or
Borough Council provided Lori Payne the autonomy to claim whatever number of hours
was necessary in order to complete her work as the Code Enforcement Officer and to work
the necessary hours when convenient for her. Payne added hours to or subtracted hours
from available patrol and code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to
have more budget flexibility in available patrol hours for remaining Officers.
From 2004 through August 27, 2009, Lori Payne received $26,897.48 as a result of
wage increases associated with her promotions to Sergeant and Chief of Police with the
EPPD as detailed in Fact Finding 43.
With regard to Payne’s SFIs, the parties have stipulated that an SFI compliance
review conducted at the Borough Municipal Building on October 16, 2008, confirmed that
Payne had no SFI on file with the Borough for calendar year 2007. Payne had submitted
SFIs to the Borough for calendar years 2004, 2005, and 2006.
Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply
the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case.
Payne, 08-063
Page 18
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 when Payne recommended to East Pittsburgh
Borough Council that his daughter, Lori Payne, be
promoted to the positions of Sergeant and Police Chief.
b. That no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a),
occurred regarding allegations that Payne scheduled
work hours for his daughter and approved time sheets
with payroll for hours not worked.
c. That an unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the
Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1104(a), occurred when Payne did not file a Statement
of Financial Interests for the 2007 calendar year by May
1, 2008.
4. Payne agrees to make payment in the amount of $2,000.00 in
settlement of this matter payable to the East Pittsburgh
Borough and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final
adjudication in this matter.
5. Payne agrees to file a Statement of Financial Interests for the
2007 calendar year with East Pittsburgh Borough and forward
a copy to the State Ethics Commission for compliance
purposes 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 1-2.
In considering the Consent Agreement, it is clear that a violation of Section 1103(a)
of the Ethics Act occurred when Payne recommended to Borough Council that his
daughter, Lori Payne, be promoted to the positions of Sergeant and Police Chief with the
EPPD. Each element of the violation has been established.
Payne used the authority of his public office as Borough Mayor when, during the
August 10, 2004, Borough Council meeting, he participated in the discussion to create a
third Sergeant position with the EPPD and the discussions leading up to Council’s decision
Payne, 08-063
Page 19
to give the position to Lori Payne. Payne provided information to Council, after being
solicited for comments and information by Members of Council.
Lori Payne’s rate of pay increased from $10.00 per hour to $10.60 per hour as a
result of her promotion to Sergeant. Lori Payne received an extra $5,930.10 in gross
wages as a result of the wage increase associated with her promotion to Sergeant.
Similarly, Payne used the authority of his public office as Mayor in furtherance of his
daughter’s appointment to the position of Borough Chief of Police when, at the January 15,
2008, workshop and regular meeting of Borough Council, he participated in discussions
with Council and made recommendations resulting in the appointment of his daughter to
the position of Borough Chief of Police and the establishment of her wages in that position.
Payne used the authority of his office as Mayor when he announced that candidates from
within the EPPD who were qualified to step in to the vacant Chief of Police position were
potentially limited to Lori Payne and Cain, and then compared Lori Payne’s and Cain’s
qualifications and stated that Lori Payne was the best choice for the position. Payne
presented to Council that Lori Payne fill the vacant Chief of Police position at the wage of
$18.50 per hour. Payne informed Council that Lori Payne was interested in accepting the
position if offered. But for being Borough Mayor, being in charge of the EPPD, and being in
a position to make recommendations as to promotions within the EPPD, Payne would not
have been in a position to advocate his daughter’s promotion.
Lori Payne’s rate of pay with the EPPD increased $7.15 per hour from $11.35 per
hour to $18.50 per hour as a result of her promotion to Chief of Police, and she also
received $200.00 per month for benefits. For hours worked from August 14, 2009, through
August 21, 2009, Lori Payne received an extra $20,967.38 in gross wages as a result of
the wage increase associated with her promotion to Chief of Police.
Payne’s aforesaid uses of the authority of his office as Borough Mayor resulted in
private pecuniary benefits to Lori Payne consisting of the increased wages that she
received as a result of her promotions to Sergeant and Chief of Police. From 2004 through
August 27, 2009, Lori Payne received $26,897.48 as a result of wage increases
associated with her promotions to Sergeant and Chief of Police with the EPPD as detailed
in Fact Finding 43.
With each element of the violation established, we hold that a violation of Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Payne recommended to Borough Council that his
daughter, Lori Payne, be promoted to the positions of Sergeant and Police Chief with the
EPPD. Cf., Martin, Order 1483; Klitsch, Order 1462.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings before us, we accept the recommendation of
the parties for a finding that no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred
regarding allegations that Payne scheduled work hours for his daughter and approved time
sheets with payroll for hours not worked. Although the Stipulated Findings establish that
Lori Payne was routinely issued payment for hours that were not specifically documented
on the posted Police schedules, and that Payne added hours to or subtracted hours from
available patrol and code enforcement budget hours paid to Lori Payne in order to have
more budget flexibility in available patrol hours for remaining Officers, the Stipulated
Findings do not establish to what extent, if any, Lori Payne may have received
unauthorized compensation for hours not worked.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings, we hold that no violation of Section 1103(a) of
the Ethics Act occurred regarding allegations that Payne scheduled work hours for his
daughter and approved time sheets with payroll for hours not worked.
We hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred
when Payne did not file an SFI for the 2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008. Although intent
Payne, 08-063
Page 20
is not a requisite element of a violation of the Ethics Act, see, Yocabet v. State Ethics
Commission, 531 A.2d 536 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1987), the parties are in agreement that the
aforesaid violation was unintentional, and we note that Payne had submitted SFIs to the
Borough for calendar years 2004, 2005, and 2006.
As part of the Consent Agreement, Payne has agreed to make payment in the
amount of $2,000.00 payable to East Pittsburgh Borough and forwarded to this
Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Payne has further agreed to file with the Borough an SFI for calendar year 2007 and
to forward a copy of such filing to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
the final adjudication in this matter for compliance verification purposes.
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, Payne is directed to make
payment in the amount of $2,000.00 payable to East Pittsburgh Borough and forwarded to
th
this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this
adjudication and Order.
Payne is directed to file with the Borough an SFI for calendar year 2007 and to
th
forward a copy of such filing to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day
after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order.
Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further
action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order
enforcement action.
IV.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. As Mayor of East Pittsburgh Borough (“Borough”), Allegheny County, from January
5, 1998, to the present, Respondent Louis Payne (“Payne”) has been a public
official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act
(“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
2. Payne violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he
recommended to Borough Council that his daughter, Lori Payne, be promoted to the
positions of Sergeant and Police Chief with the Borough Police Department.
3. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
regarding allegations that Payne scheduled work hours for his daughter and
approved time sheets with payroll for hours not worked.
4. An unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1104(a), occurred when Payne did not file a Statement of Financial Interests for the
2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008.
In Re: Louis Payne, : File Docket: 08-063
Respondent : Date Decided: 3/25/10
: Date Mailed: 4/9/10
ORDER NO. 1550
1. Louis Payne (“Payne”), a public official in his capacity as Mayor of East Pittsburgh
Borough (“Borough”) from January 5, 1998, to the present, violated Section 1103(a)
of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a),
when he recommended to Borough Council that his daughter, Lori Payne, be
promoted to the positions of Sergeant and Police Chief with the Borough Police
Department.
2. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
regarding allegations that Payne scheduled work hours for his daughter and
approved time sheets with payroll for hours not worked.
3. An unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1104(a), occurred when Payne did not file a Statement of Financial Interests (“SFI”)
for the 2007 calendar year by May 1, 2008.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Payne is directed to make payment in
the amount of $2,000.00 payable to East Pittsburgh Borough and forwarded to the
th
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after
the mailing date of this Order.
5. Payne is directed to file with the Borough an SFI for calendar year 2007 and to
forward a copy of such filing to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no
th
later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this Order.
6. Compliance with Paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Order will result in the closing of this
case with no further action by this Commission.
a. Non-compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
___________________________
Louis W. Fryman, Chair