Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1567 DeJulia In Re: Vincent DeJulia, : File Docket: 09-031 Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1567 : Date Decided: 10/19/10 : Date Mailed: 10/26/10 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 allegation(s). 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. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 2 I.ALLEGATIONS: That Vince DeJulia, a public official/public employee in his capacity as a Member of the South Pymatuning Township Authority, violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a) and 1105(b) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), 1104(a) and 1105(b), when he used the authority of his office for private pecuniary benefit, including but not limited to increasing his rate of compensation as a Board Member without approval of the South Pymatuning Township Board of Supervisors, the appointing authority; and then subsequently participating in actions of the Authority Board to issue payments to him; when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 calendar years; and when he failed to disclose all direct/indirect sources of income on a Statement of Financial Interests form filed for the 2008 calendar year. II.FINDINGS: 1. Vincent DeJulia has served as a Member of the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority (hereafter Authority) from March 11, 2003, through the present. a. DeJulia has served as the Secretary of the Authority Board from January 5, 2004, through the present. 2. The South Pymatuning Township Supervisors created the Authority via Ordinance presented at a meeting of the Township Supervisors on September 30, 1968. 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 336376 on October 28, 1968. 1. Department of State Corporation Bureau records document no registered office address for the Authority. 2. The Authority utilizes the address of the South Pymatuning Township municipal building (located at 3483 Tamarack Drive, Sharpsville, PA 16150) as its registered office. c. The Authority provides sewage service for only a portion of South Pymatuning Township. 1. Approximately sixty percent of the Township is tapped into the public sewage system. aa. South Pymatuning Township does not maintain its own sewage processing plant. 1. Sewage from properties tapped into the infrastructure is pumped to processing plants operated by the Sharon Municipal Authority and the Hermitage Municipal Authority respectively. 2. Remaining Township residents utilize on-lot septic systems for sewage disposal purposes. 3. The South Pymatuning Township Supervisors are responsible for appointing the Members of the Authority Board and setting Board Member compensation. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 3 a. Authority Board Members serve five year terms. b. Pursuant to the provisions of the Municipality Authorities Act, compensation provided for Authority Board Members must be established by the appointing authority. 1. Board Members are not permitted to receive an increase or decrease in compensation during their existing terms. 2. Any increase or decrease in salary becomes effective only upon the beginning of a new term after the increase/decrease is enacted. 4. The Authority adopted By-Laws regarding policies and procedures to be followed in relation to the conduction of Authority business. a. Authority By-Laws were not available for review. 1. The Authority By-Laws could not be located by Authority representatives or Township representatives. 5. The original Articles of Incorporation associated with the Authority provided for a five Member Board of Directors. a. The Articles of Incorporation specifically mandated that the Authority was limited to the undertaking of only those projects which it was directed to undertake by resolution or ordinance of the Board of Supervisors. 6. The Authority is currently governed by a five Member Board of Directors. a. The Authority Board holds one regularly scheduled meeting per month on the first Tuesday of each month. 1. Special meetings are held as necessary. b. The Township Supervisors appointed a specific alternate Member to the Authority Board in March 2003, January 2007, January 2008, and January 2009. 1. The initial alternate Board Member appointed served as such from March 2003 until December 2005. 2. No alternate Board Member was specifically appointed by the Township Supervisors in 2007. 7. Voting at Authority meetings is normally conducted via group “aye/nay” vote after a motion is made and properly seconded. a. All Board Members, including the Board Chairman, vote on motions presented. b. If any Authority Member objects during the group vote, an individual roll call vote is taken and recorded. c. Any objections or abstentions cast are specifically noted in the minutes. 1. Minutes of Authority Board meetings are approved for accuracy at DeJulia, 09-031 Page 4 subsequent meetings. 8. No specific meeting packets are compiled for Authority Board Members to review prior to Authority Board meetings. a. Documents provided to the Authority Board Members at each meeting include an agenda developed by the Board Chairman, a report developed by the Authority engineer, and a Treasurer’s report generated by the recording secretary. b. The recording secretary also compiles a bill list which is presented to the board for review at the regular monthly meeting. 1. The bill list represents all those bills received by the Authority since the prior legislative meeting. 9. Signature authority over Authority accounts is maintained by all five Members of the Authority Board. a. Authority checks require two live signatures. b. Facsimile stamps are not utilized by the Authority. 10. Authority Board Members are currently authorized by South Pymatuning Township to receive compensation at the rate of $50.00 (gross) per meeting. a. The Board of Supervisors set this compensation in December 2002 (Finding No. 27). 1. Prior to this time Authority Members were not compensated. b. Board Members must be present in order to receive the $50.00 payment. c. The $50.00 per meeting payment is applicable to Authority meetings as well as any meetings attended which relate to the Authority. 11. Payment issued to Authority Board Members for meeting attendance is specifically documented on the bill list presented for review and approval. a. The Authority secretary sends an e-mail message to every Board Member on a monthly basis in order to determine the amount of compensation to issue to each respective Board Member. 1. The e-mail requests each respective Board Member to inform the secretary of the number of meetings which were attended during the prior month. b. The Authority secretary generates checks for each respective Board Member based on the response received. c. The Authority secretary transports the checks to the Authority meeting for required signatures and subsequent distribution. 12. Although originally incorporated as a five Member Board, frequent lack of meeting attendance by Board Members prompted the Authority Board to consider increasing the size of the Authority Board. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 5 a. From the mid-1990s through 1999 Authority Board meetings were often cancelled due to the lack of a quorum of the total Members. b. The Authority Board petitioned the Township for an increase in the size of the Authority Board from five Members to seven Members with the optimism that: 1. A quorum of four out of seven Members would be easier to achieve than three out of five Members. 2. An increase in the number of Board Members would provide residents of the Township with larger representation on the Authority. 13. At the March 7, 2000, meeting of the Authority Board, the Authority passed Resolution 1-2000 to be presented to the Township Supervisors proposing that the membership of the Authority be increased. a. Resolution 1-2000 called for the increase of Members on the Authority Board from five to seven Members. b. Resolution 1-2000 passed via unanimous 4-0 vote. 1. Board Member James Pritchard was not present for the meeting. 14. Upon submission to the Township Supervisors, the Supervisors adopted Resolution 4 of 2000 titled, “A Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of the Township of South Pymatuning, Mercer County, Pennsylvania, Adopted March 17, 2000 Approving An Amendment of the Articles of Incorporation of the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority to Increase the Number of Members of the Board of the Authority.” a. The Supervisors approved the amendments to the Authority’s Articles of Incorporation as documented in the resolution presented for consideration at the March 17, 2000, Supervisors continuation meeting. 1. The Supervisors approved the general increase in size of the Authority Board at the March 13, 2000, Supervisors meeting. b. The Township Supervisors signed Resolution 4 of 2000 signifying Township approval of the addition of two seats to the Authority Board. 1. The Authority failed to provide the amendment to the Articles of Incorporation to the Pennsylvania Department of State. 15. The desire of Authority Board Members to receive compensation for service on the Board was first presented to the Township Supervisors for consideration at least as early as December 17, 2001. a. Authority Board Members had historically served as unpaid volunteers in their positions through that time. 16. Minutes of the December 17, 2001, Supervisors Special Meeting document then Authority Board Member Mark Presley questioning the Supervisors regarding Authority Board Members receiving compensation. a. The entire Authority Board and Authority solicitor were in attendance at the meeting with the exception of Board Member David Sopko. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 6 b. The Township did not approve compensation for Authority Board Members at that time. 17. The Authority made the request to the Board of Supervisors due to the provisions of the Municipality Authorities Act of 1945 mandating that members of boards of authorities (with the exception of school district authorities) may only receive salaries as determined by the governing body of the appointing municipality. a. Members of authority boards are not permitted to establish, increase, or decrease their own compensation. b. Salaries of board members cannot be increased or diminished during the term for which the member was appointed. 18. At the January 2, 2002, Authority meeting, the Authority Board requested its solicitor to inform the Township Supervisors of the Authority’s position on various issues under consideration. a. Issues under consideration included the size of the Board, appointment of new Board Members, and salaries for Board Members. 19. In correspondence dated January 4, 2002, to the Township Supervisors, the Authority solicitor presented the Authority’s position that: a. The Authority Board was opposed to reducing its membership to five Members and would refuse to adopt the required resolution to do so; b. The Authority recommended David Haywood be appointed to a vacant position on the Board as well as additional term amendments in order to achieve required term staggering; and c. The Authority Board was renewing its request that its Members be paid for each regular meeting attended at the rate of fifty dollars per meeting. 1. The correspondence identified extra Board Member responsibilities regarding the Authority beyond regular meeting attendance including managing finances, answering concerns of the public, attending meetings with the Borough of Clark Sewer Committee, and attending meetings of the Upper Shenango Valley Water Pollution Control Authority (USVWPCA). 2. The correspondence documented that all extra responsibilities would remain uncompensated including attending special meetings or meetings with the Township Supervisors. 20. The Township Supervisors did not approve compensation for Authority Board Members as a result of the second request made in January 4, 2002. a. Authority Board Members continued to serve as unpaid volunteers in their positions through 2002. 21. At the November 14, 2002, Authority meeting, the Authority Board again requested its solicitor to inform the Township Supervisors of the Authority’s position on various issues under consideration by both the Authority and the Supervisors. a. Issues under consideration again included the size of the Authority Board, DeJulia, 09-031 Page 7 appointment of new Board Members, and salaries for Board Members. b. Additionally considered were the advantages and disadvantages of disbanding the Authority and creating a Sewer Committee as well as increasing Township revenues by performing services for the Authority. c. Supervisor Burt DeVries was present at and participated in the discussions held at the November 14, 2002, Authority Board meeting. 22. In correspondence to the Township Supervisors dated November 19, 2002, the Authority solicitor presented the Authority’s position on multiple issues, including: a. That the Authority Board be reduced from seven to five Members; b. That appointments/reappointments be made as follows: 1. Reappointment of Evelyn Klein to the Authority Board for a five year term expiring on December 31, 2007. 2. Appointment of an interested Supervisor to complete Robert Mocker’s unexpired term of office to expire on December 31, 2005. aa. Appointment of an interested Supervisor was recommended to provide the Supervisors with a direct role in the administration of the Authority and problems encountered by the Authority. bb. The Authority Board recommended Mocker’s removal due to the fact that Mocker had attended only one meeting in 2002 to date. 3. Appointment of DeJulia as an alternate Member of the Authority Board. aa. Appointment of an alternate Member was recommended in order to provide a “back-up” Member for purposes of achieving a quorum when needed. c. [Approval] for establishment of a salary for Authority Members at the rate of fifty dollars per regular meeting attended. d. The Supervisors would be confronted with solving all of the problems encountered by the Authority and lose the comfort of having the Authority serve as a buffer for the Supervisors if the Authority was disbanded. 23. As of November 18, 2002, Board Members still serving on the Authority for the 2002 calendar year [included] Pritchard, Mocker, Klein, Chris Novak, and David Haywood. a. DeJulia was not a Member of the Board in 2002. b. Mocker was removed from his position as an Authority Board Member at the November 18, 2002, continuation meeting of the Township Supervisors. 1. Nashtock motioned, seconded by DeVries, for the removal of Mocker from the Authority Board for failure to attend more than three consecutive meetings per the Authority By-Laws. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 8 2. The motion passed via unanimous 2-0 vote. aa. Supervisor Michael Derr was not present at the meeting. c. Authority Members Francis Pavcik and Mark Presley resigned as Board Members prior to November 2002. 24. The specific size of the Authority Board was reduced from seven Members to five Members at the November 22, 2002, meeting of the Township Supervisors. a. Nashtock motioned, seconded by DeVries, to reduce the size of the Authority Board from seven to five Members. 1. The motion passed via unanimous 2-0 vote. aa. Derr was not present at the meeting. b. The Supervisors passed no specific Resolution documenting the reduction in size of the Authority Board from seven to five Members. 25. Subsequent to the reduction in size of the Authority Board, a motion was made at the November 22, 2002, Supervisors meeting by DeVries, seconded by Nashtock, to appoint Nashtock to the Authority Board. a. The motion passed via unanimous 2-0 vote. 1. Supervisor Derr was not present at the meeting. 26. At the December 4, 2002, continuation meeting of the Township Supervisors, multiple motions were made and unanimously approved relating to the Authority. a. Nashtock motioned, seconded by DeVries, to accept the resignations of Pritchard, Novak, and Haywood. 1. Haywood and Pritchard were subsequently re-appointed to the Authority Board at the January 6, 2003, re-organization meeting of the Township Supervisors. b. Nashtock motioned, seconded by DeVries, to appoint DeVries to fill Novak’s position on the Authority Board. c. Both of the motions passed via unanimous 2-0 vote. 1. Derr was not present at the meeting. 27. At the December 4, 2002, meeting an additional motion was made by Nashtock, seconded by DeVries, to set compensation for Authority Board Members to be paid from Authority accounts as designated by the Authority Board. a. The motion called for Authority Board Members to receive compensation in the amount of $50.00 per meeting. 1. The $50.00 per meeting payment was documented as being effective January 1, 2003, for Board Members starting their term on or after this date. b. The motion passed via 2-0 unanimous vote. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 9 c. The motion did not specify if Authority Board Members were entitled to receive the $50.00 per meeting attended for meetings outside regular Authority meetings (i.e., meetings with the Authority engineer, attendance at USVWPCA meetings, etc.). 28. Prior to December 2002, the South Pymatuning Township Supervisors had never approved Members of the Authority Board to receive compensation for their service/meeting attendance. a. The Authority Board had initiated requests to the Township Supervisors to approve compensation for Board Members as early as, if not prior to, December 2001. b. Individuals serving as Board Members had done so as unpaid volunteers from the inception of the Authority. 29. From January 1, 2003, through the present, Authority Board Members were authorized to receive $50.00 per meeting attended per approval by the Township Supervisors at the December 4, 2002, continuation meeting. a. The Township Supervisors did not approve any increase in Authority Board Member compensation from January 1, 2003, through the present. 30. Between 2003 and 2008 the Authority increased Member compensation on three separate occasions without seeking the approval of the South Pymatuning Township Supervisors. a. DeJulia was present at Authority meetings in 2005, 2006, and 2008 and is recorded in Authority meeting minutes as voting to increase the compensation. b. Minutes of the Authority meetings confirm the following regarding increases to Member compensation: January 5, 2005: The Authority went into executive session. The Authority returned from executive session. Vince DeJulia made a motion to increase Lori Gill’s salary to $1,000.00 per month, Dave Haywood seconded. All Members approved. Dave Haywood made a motion [to] increase the Board Members pay per meeting to $75.00 per meeting, Vince DeJulia seconded. All Members approved. 1. Board Member Klein was not present for this meeting. Members voting were Nashtock, DeVries, DeJulia and Haywood. January 4, 2006: Dave Haywood made a motion to pay the Authority Members $100.00 per meeting for the South Pymatuning Municipal Authority and $75.00 per meeting for the USVWPCA, Vince DeJulia seconded. All Members approved. 1. Members present and voting were Nashtock, DeVries, DeJulia, Klein and Haywood. January 18, 2008: At 6:00 p.m. the Board went into Executive Session to discuss DeJulia, 09-031 Page 10 personnel matters and reconvened at 6:10 p.m. A motion was made by Mr. DeVries, seconded by Mrs. Klein to set the regular monthly meeting pay for all Board Members to $150.00 and reduce the extra meeting and continued meeting pays to $50.00 per meeting. Any Member that attends a USVWPCA meeting will be credited with an extra meeting pay. The rate increase is effective February 1, 2008. Motion carried. 1. Board Members voting were DeJulia, DeVries, Klein, Nashtock and Schenker. 31. The following reflects the actions by the Authority Board to increase compensation between 2005 and 2008: Meeting Date Members Meeting Meeting Compensation Vote Present Compensation Approved by Authority Established by Supervisors January 5, 2005 M. Nashtock $50.00 per meeting $75.00 per meeting 4-0 B. DeVries V. DeJulia D. Haywood January 4, 2006 M. Nashtock $50.00 per meeting $100.00 per Authority meeting 5-0 B. DeVries V. DeJulia $75.00 per USVWPCA meeting E. Klein D. Haywood January 18, 2008 M. Nashtock $50.00 per meeting $150.00 per Authority meeting 5-0 B. DeVries V. DeJulia $50.00 per extra and continued E. Klein meetings J. Schenker a. None of the increases in compensation were presented to the South Pymatuning Township Supervisors for consideration or approval prior to enacting. 1. Two of the five Authority Members voting to increase compensation either were or had been Members of the Township Board of Supervisors. b. Nashtock did not inform the Township Supervisors of Authority Board actions to increase Board Member compensation in 2005, 2006 or 2008 although serving as both a South Pymatuning Township Supervisor and Authority Board Member during those years. c. DeJulia was present for and voted in favor of each increase of Board Member compensation. 32. The Authority maintained a minimum of four separate accounts at First National Bank (FNB) spanning the time period of May 2004 through August 2009 including Account Numbers XXXX406 and XXXXX526. a. Account Number XXXX406 was a preferred interest checking account. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 11 1. Account Number XXXX406 was opened on November 21, 1979, and closed on October 18, 2006. b. Account Number XXXXX526 is a preferred interest checking account. 1. Account Number XXXXX526 was opened on September 6, 2009, and is currently active. c. Checks issued to Authority Board Members as compensation for meeting attendance originated from Account Numbers XXXX406 and XXXXX526. 33. DeJulia participated in actions as an Authority Board Member in approving monthly bill lists which included payment to DeJulia for attendance at Authority and additional outside meetings. a. DeJulia voted to approve monthly bill lists on at least fifty-two of fifty-five occasions on which payment to DeJulia was documented to which DeJulia was not wholly entitled. 1. A total of fifty-five regular Authority meetings were held from February 2005 through August 2009. aa. Payment received by Board Members was legitimate through January 2005. 2. Votes cast at the June 2005 meeting could not be determined due to the absence of minutes in Authority records for those meetings. 3. Minutes of the March 8, 2005, and September 5, 2006, meetings did not record a specific motion, second, or vote to approve monthly bills. 34. From February 2005 through August 2009, DeJulia received compensation as an Authority Board Member in excess of the amount specifically approved by the Township Supervisors. a. DeJulia accepted the increases in compensation as an Authority Board Member prior to his formal re-appointment to a new term. 1. DeJulia was re-appointed to a full five year term in January 2004. aa. Township re-organization meeting minutes for January 2004 incorrectly document DeVries as having been re-appointed. 2. DeJulia was not eligible for any increase in compensation as an Authority Board Member until his re-appointment in January 2009. b. DeJulia was present at the January 5, 2005, January 4, 2006, and January 18, 2008, Authority meetings and voted in favor of the motions to increase Authority Board Member compensation as presented at the meetings. 1. Any increase in Authority Board Member compensation must be approved by the appointing municipal body. 35. From February 2005 through August 2009, DeJulia received and negotiated a minimum of fifty-four checks and one credit memo from Authority accounts which included compensation not approved by the appointing Authority for attendance at DeJulia, 09-031 Page 12 Authority and additional outside meetings. a. Of the fifty-four checks and one credit memo issued to DeJulia representative of attendance at Authority and additional outside meetings which included illegitimate compensation, DeJulia signed at least two checks as an authorized Authority signatory. b. DeJulia deposited into personal bank accounts or cashed all checks received and utilized the funds for various personal use. 36. Ongoing payment to Authority Board Members was suspended by the Authority Board at the October 6, 2009, Authority meeting. a. Noted under “New Business” was that the Board hold payment for October and future meetings until informed by the Commission of a resolution to the potential conflict of Members adjusting their own compensation. 1. Commission refers to the State Ethics Commission. b. The motion passed unanimously. 1. DeJulia was present at the meeting and participated in the unanimous vote. 37. DeJulia realized a private pecuniary gain through the authority of his office as an Authority Board Member when he accepted an increase in compensation as an Authority Board Member prior to the start of a new term, when he participated in votes as an Authority Board Member to increase Board Member compensation without the approval of the Township Supervisors, when he participated in Authority votes to approve bill lists on which payment to him as an Authority Board Member was documented, and when he signed checks issued to him from Authority accounts as an authorized Authority signatory. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT DEJULIA FAILED TO FILE STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS IN HIS POSITION AS A MEMBER OF THE SOUTH PYMATUNING TOWNSHIP AUTHORITY BOARD FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2005, 2006, AND 2007; AND THAT DEJULIA FAILED TO DISCLOSE ALL DIRECT/INDIRECT SOURCES OF INCOME ON HIS STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FORM FILED FOR THE 2008 CALENDAR YEAR. 38. Statement of Financial Interests filing requirements for public officials and public employees are mandated by Section 1104 of the State Ethics Act. st a. DeJulia was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1 annually in his position as a South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority Board Member. 39. On May 20, 2009, and August 26, 2009, a review of various records including Statements of Financial Interests was conducted at the South Pymatuning Township municipal building. a. No Statements of Financial Interests were present for DeJulia in his position as an Authority Board Member for calendar years 2005, 2006, or 2007. 40. DeJulia was aware of the requirement to file Statements of Financial Interests in his position as an Authority Board Member. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 13 a. DeJulia received a Statement of Financial Interests form for completion from the Authority Secretary on an annual basis. 41. Section 1105(b)(5) of the State Ethics Act requires disclosure of the name and address of any direct or indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate $1,300.00 or more on Statements of Financial interests filed. a. DeJulia received income from the Authority in the amount of $2,075.00 in 2008. b. DeJulia failed to disclose income received from the Authority on his Statement of Financial Interests filed in 2009 representative of the 2008 calendar year. 42. DeJulia’s 2008 calendar year Statement of Financial Interests documented no direct or indirect source of income. III.DISCUSSION: As a Member of the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority (“Authority”) from March 11, 2003, through the present, Respondent Vincent DeJulia, hereinafter also referred to as “Respondent,” “Respondent DeJulia,” and “DeJulia,” 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 Respondent DeJulia violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a) and 1105(b) of the Ethics Act: (1) when he used the authority of his office for private pecuniary benefit, including but not limited to increasing his rate of compensation as a Board Member without approval of the South Pymatuning Township (“Township”) Board of Supervisors, the appointing authority, and then subsequently participating in actions of the Authority Board to issue payments to him; (2) when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests (“SFIs”) for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 calendar years; and (3) when he failed to disclose all direct/indirect sources of income on an SFI form filed for the 2008 calendar year. 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 DeJulia, 09-031 Page 14 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. Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act and its subsections detail the financial disclosure that a person required to file the Statement of Financial Interests form must provide. Subject to certain statutory exceptions not applicable to this matter, Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the Statement of Financial Interests the name and address of any direct or indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate $1,300 or more. 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 Authority was created in 1968 pursuant to the Municipality Authorities Act. The Members of the Authority Board are appointed by the Township Board of Supervisors. Pursuant to the Municipality Authorities Act, compensation provided for Authority Board Members must be established by the Township Board of Supervisors as the appointing authority. Authority Board Members are not permitted to receive an increase or decrease in compensation during their existing terms. Any increase or decrease in salary becomes effective only upon the beginning of a new term. Respondent DeJulia has served as a Member of the Authority from March 11, 2003, through the present. DeJulia has served as the Secretary of the Authority Board from January 5, 2004, through the present. In December 2002 the Township Board of Supervisors set the compensation of Authority Board Members at the rate of $50.00 gross per meeting attended. The $50.00 per meeting payment was documented as being effective January 1, 2003, for Board Members starting their term on or after that date. Although the approved motion did not specify whether Authority Board Members would be entitled to compensation for meetings outside regular Authority meetings (Fact Finding 27 c), the parties have stipulated that the $50.00 per meeting payment is applicable to Authority meetings as well as any meetings attended that relate to the Authority (Fact Finding 10c). From January 1, 2003, through the present, Authority Board Members were authorized to receive $50.00 per meeting attended. The Township Board of Supervisors did not approve any increase in Authority Board Member compensation from January 1, 2003, through the present. At Authority Board meetings held on January 5, 2005, January 4, 2006, and January DeJulia, 09-031 Page 15 18, 2008, the Authority Board voted to increase its Members’ compensation as detailed in Fact Findings 30-31. None of these increases in compensation were presented to the Township Board of Supervisors for consideration or approval prior to enactment. At the January 5, 2005, and January 4, 2006, Authority Board meetings, DeJulia seconded the motions and participated in the Authority Board votes to increase Authority Board Member compensation. At the January 18, 2008, Authority Board meeting, DeJulia participated in the Authority Board vote to increase Authority Board Member compensation. Two of the five Authority Board Members voting to increase compensation either were or had been Members of the Township Board of Supervisors. Nashtock did not inform the Township Board of Supervisors of Authority Board actions to increase Board Member compensation in 2005, 2006 or 2008 even though Nashtock served as both a Township Supervisor and Authority Board Member during those years. A total of 55 regular Authority meetings were held from February 2005 through August 2009. DeJulia voted to approve monthly bill lists on at least 52 of 55 occasions in which payment to DeJulia for meeting attendance was documented to which DeJulia was not wholly entitled. From February 2005 through August 2009, DeJulia received and negotiated a minimum of 54 Authority checks and one credit memo that included meeting compensation to DeJulia which had not been approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. DeJulia signed as an authorized Authority signatory at least two of the aforesaid checks issued to him. DeJulia deposited into personal bank accounts or cashed all checks received and utilized the funds for various personal use. From February 2005 through August 2009, DeJulia received compensation as an Authority Board Member in excess of the amount specifically approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. Additionally, DeJulia accepted the illegitimate increases in compensation as an Authority Board Member prior to his formal re-appointment to a new term. At the October 6, 2009, Authority Board meeting, DeJulia participated in a unanimous vote of the Board to suspend further meeting payments to Authority Board Members until informed by this Commission of a resolution to the potential conflict of Members adjusting their own compensation. The parties have stipulated that DeJulia realized a private pecuniary gain through the authority of his office as an Authority Board Member when he accepted an increase in compensation as an Authority Board Member prior to the start of a new term, when he participated in votes as an Authority Board Member to increase Board Member compensation without the approval of the Township Board of Supervisors, when he participated in Authority votes to approve bill lists on which payment to him as an Authority Board Member was documented, and when he signed checks issued to him from Authority accounts as an authorized Authority signatory. On May 20, 2009, and August 26, 2009, a review of SFIs was conducted at the Township municipal building. No SFIs were present for DeJulia as an Authority Board Member for calendar years 2005, 2006 or 2007. Additionally, DeJulia’s SFI for calendar year 2008 documented no direct or indirect source of income despite the fact that DeJulia had received income in the amount of $2,075.00 from the Authority in 2008. Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case. DeJulia, 09-031 Page 16 The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations as follows: 3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the above allegations: a. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when DeJulia participated in increasing his rate of compensation, as a Board Member, without approval of the South Pymatuning Township Board of Supervisors, the appointing Authority; and his receipt of said compensation. b. That an unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1104(a), occurred in relation to the allegation that DeJulia failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 calendar years with the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority. c. That an unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1105(b), occurred when DeJulia failed to list all sources of direct or indirect income on his 2008 Statement of Financial Interests. 4. DeJulia agrees to make payment in the amount of $1,500.00 in settlement of this matter payable to the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 5. If DeJulia has not already done so, he agrees to file amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar year 2008 listing all sources of income; and file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2005, 2006 and 2007 with the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority, and forward copies [of] all filings to this Commission. 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, we accept the recommendation of the DeJulia, 09-031 Page 17 parties for a finding that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when DeJulia participated in increasing his rate of compensation as an Authority Board Member, without approval of the Township Board of Supervisors, and received said compensation. DeJulia used the authority of his public office as an Authority Board Member at the January 5, 2005, and January 4, 2006, Authority Board meetings, when he seconded the motions and participated in the Authority Board votes to increase Authority Board Member compensation. DeJulia used the authority of his public office as an Authority Board Member at the January 18, 2008, Authority Board meeting, when he participated in the Authority Board vote to increase Authority Board Member compensation. DeJulia voted to approve monthly bill lists on at least 52 of 55 occasions in which payment to DeJulia for meeting attendance was documented to which DeJulia was not wholly entitled. Additionally, DeJulia signed as an authorized Authority signatory at least two of the Authority checks issued to him that included meeting compensation which had not been approved by the Township Board of Supervisors. The resulting private pecuniary benefit to DeJulia consisted of unauthorized meeting pay that DeJulia received. The parties have not quantified such private pecuniary benefit. However, based upon the Consent Agreement, the parties are in agreement that the private pecuniary benefit received by DeJulia was not de minimis. Intent is not a requisite element for a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act. See, e.g., Yocabet v. State Ethics Commission, 531 A.2d 536 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987). Nevertheless, based upon the Stipulated Findings, it would appear that the aforesaid violation was unintentional. We hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when DeJulia participated in increasing his rate of compensation as an Authority Board Member, without approval of the Township Board of Supervisors (the appointing authority), and received said compensation. Cf., Russell v. State Ethics Commission, 987 A.2d 835 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009), allocatur denied, No. 22 WAL 2010 (Pa. August 11, 2010). We further hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to the allegation that DeJulia failed to file SFIs for the 2005, 2006, and 2007 calendar years with the Authority. Finally, we hold that an unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act occurred when DeJulia failed to list all direct or indirect sources of income on his SFI for calendar year 2008. As part of the Consent Agreement, Respondent has agreed to make payment in the amount of $1,500.00 payable to the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. To the extent he has not already done so, Respondent has further agreed to file with the Authority an amended SFI for calendar year 2008 listing all sources of income and SFIs for calendar years 2005, 2006, and 2007 and to forward copies of all such filings to this Commission. 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 DeJulia is DeJulia, 09-031 Page 18 directed to make payment in the amount of $1,500.00 payable to the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the th thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order. To the extent he has not already done so, Respondent DeJulia is directed to file with the Authority an amended SFI for calendar year 2008 listing all sources of income and SFIs for calendar years 2005, 2006 and 2007 and to forward copies of all such filings to th 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 South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority (“Authority”) from March 11, 2003, through the present, Respondent Vincent DeJulia (“DeJulia”) 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. DeJulia unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he participated in increasing his rate of compensation as an Authority Board Member, without approval of the South Pymatuning Township Board of Supervisors (the appointing authority), and received said compensation. 3. An unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred in relation to the allegation that DeJulia failed to file Statements of Financial Interests (“SFIs”) for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 calendar years with the Authority. 4. An unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), occurred when DeJulia failed to list all direct or indirect sources of income on his SFI for calendar year 2008. In Re: Vincent DeJulia, : File Docket: 09-031 Respondent : Date Decided: 10/19/10 : Date Mailed: 10/26/10 ORDER NO. 1567 1. As a Member of the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority (“Authority”), Vincent DeJulia (“DeJulia”) unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he participated in increasing his rate of compensation as an Authority Board Member, without approval of the South Pymatuning Township Board of Supervisors (the appointing authority), and received said compensation. 2. An unintentional violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred in relation to the allegation that DeJulia failed to file Statements of Financial Interests (“SFIs”) for the 2005, 2006 and 2007 calendar years with the Authority. 3. An unintentional violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), occurred when DeJulia failed to list all direct or indirect sources of income on his SFI for calendar year 2008. 4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, DeJulia is directed to make payment in the amount of $1,500.00 payable to the South Pymatuning Township Municipal Authority and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later th than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this Order. 5. To the extent he has not already done so, DeJulia is directed to file with the Authority an amended SFI for calendar year 2008 listing all sources of income and SFIs for calendar years 2005, 2006 and 2007 and to forward copies of all such th filings to this Commission by no 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