HomeMy WebLinkAbout1596 Michael
In Re: Carl Michael, : File Docket: 10-034
Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1596
: Date Decided: 1/30/12
: Date Mailed: 2/14/12
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.” 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.
I. ALLEGATIONS:
That Carl Michael, [a] public official/public employee in his capacity as a Supervisor
for Chest Township, Clearfield County, violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a) and 1104(d) of
the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), 1104(a) and 1104(d), when
he used the authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefit of himself
and/or a business with which he is associated, Michael Auto Body, by authorizing repairs
to Township vehicles be done at his business; and when he subsequently voted to
approve payments to his company; and when he failed to file Statements of Financial
Interests for the 2006 and 2008 calendar years.
II.FINDINGS:
1. Carl Michael has served as an elected Supervisor for Chest Township (hereafter
“Township”), Clearfield County, from January 3, 2006, to the present.
a. Michael has served as Chairman of the Board from 2010 to the present.
b. Michael served as Vice-Chairman of the Board in 2006 and 2007.
c. Michael previously served as a Supervisor from 1998 to 2003.
Michael, 10-034
Page 2
2. Chest Township is a Second Class Township governed by a three-Member Board
of Supervisors.
a. Chest Township Supervisors are compensated $35.00 per meeting.
1. Supervisors are issued quarterly meeting payments.
b. The Township holds one regular monthly meeting on the second Thursday of
each month.
1. Special meetings are held as necessary.
3. Voting at Chest Township meetings occurs in an aye/nay group vote after a motion
is made and seconded.
a. All objections and/or abstentions to votes are noted in the minutes.
1. The minutes of each meeting are approved for accuracy at each
subsequent meeting.
4. Meeting packets are issued to the Supervisors approximately two days prior to
Township meetings.
a. Meeting packets include an agenda, draft minutes, bill lists, etc.
5. Bill lists are provided to the Supervisors at the regular monthly meetings for a vote
of approval.
a. Bill lists approved for payment represent all bills received by the Township
since the previous monthly meeting.
b. Bill lists document the payee, check number, check date, and check amount.
6. All three Supervisors maintain signature authority over the financial accounts
associated with the Township.
a. Two signatures are required on all checks issued by the Township.
1. Checks can be signed by any combination of the Supervisors.
7. The Board of Supervisors has annually appointed Members of the Board as
employees of the Township.
a. Michael has served as an appointed Working Supervisor from 2006 to the
present.
1. Working Supervisors perform labor duties for the Township.
b. Working Supervisors are compensated hourly for duties performed outside
the scope of their Supervisor Duties.
c. The pay rate set by the Township auditors for Working Supervisors is as
follows:
Year Amount
2006 $8.50
2007 $8.50
Michael, 10-034
Page 3
2008 $9.00
2009 $9.00
2010 $9.75
2011 $9.75
8. The Board has generally appointed all three Members as Road Masters during
annual reorganization meetings.
a. An exception to this practice occurred in 2008 when Kevin Hutton was the
only individual appointed as Township Road Master.
1. Hutton was not a Member of the Board.
b. Supervisors who serve as Road Masters typically are advisory only and do
not daily engage in labor or road repair activities.
9. Michael was annually appointed Road Master from 1998 to 2007.
a. Michael was not appointed to the position of Road Master in 2008.
b. Supervisors Michael, Leroy Brink, and Kenneth Rowles all served as
appointed Township Road Masters in 2009.
1. Kevin Hutton was also a Road Master in 2009.
10. Kevin Hutton has served as a Township Road Master since at least 1998.
a. Hutton is a full-time employee of the Township.
b. Hutton is the individual primarily responsible for the day-to-day operations of
the road crew.
c. Hutton, as Road Master, is responsible for maintaining the Township roads,
vehicles, and equipment.
1. This includes arranging for repairs and maintenance of Township
vehicles.
11. Township procedures regarding Township vehicles in need of repairs are as
follows:
a. Hutton initially attempts to repair the Township vehicle with the assistance of
the road crew.
1. Hutton’s knowledge of vehicle repairs is limited.
b. Hutton informs the first available Supervisor of any vehicle repairs that
cannot be completed by him (Hutton) or members of the road crew.
c. The Supervisor contacted by Hutton selects a vendor where the vehicle
should be serviced and notifies Hutton of the decision.
12. Quotes and/or bids are not solicited by the Supervisor(s) prior to determining where
the Township vehicle should be serviced.
a. The Supervisor’s decision to choose one mechanic shop over another is
typically based upon personal preference.
Michael, 10-034
Page 4
13. The Township Supervisors have attempted to utilize businesses located within the
geographical boundaries of the Township as much as possible.
a. Michael Auto Body (MAB) and Stiver Body Shop (SBS) are the only two
vehicle repair businesses located within the Township.
b. On rare occasions Township vehicles have been taken to Kuntz Auto for
diesel repairs.
1. Kuntz Auto is located outside the geographical boundaries of the
Township.
2. Kuntz Auto professes more experience in regards to diesel equipment
repairs as opposed to MAB and SBS.
14. Michael is the sole owner/operator of Michael Auto Body (MAB).
a. MAB was established approximately twenty years ago.
b. MAB is located within the geographical boundaries of the Township.
1. MAB is located approximately eight miles from the Township building.
c. MAB is not incorporated in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
15. MAB specializes in auto body repairs, state vehicle inspections, and various
mechanical vehicle repairs.
a. MAB is the only business within the geographical boundaries of the
Township which is certified to perform state vehicle inspections.
16. Michael does not advertise the services of MAB, with the exception of his business
telephone number being published in the Yellow Pages.
a. Michael obtains the majority of his business via word-of-mouth.
17. MAB has performed automotive repairs for the Township during Michael’s tenure as
Township Supervisor.
18. Between 2006 and 2009 Hutton usually contacted either Michael or then Supervisor
Leroy Brink to advise them of needed vehicle repairs.
a. Brink also has experience in vehicle repairs.
b. Brink never recommended Township vehicles be taken to MAB for repairs.
1. Brink and Michael are political adversaries.
c. Brink routinely recommended that Hutton transport vehicles to SBS for
repair.
19. When contacted by Hutton, Michael would authorize Hutton to have Township
vehicles serviced by either MAB or SBS.
Michael, 10-034
Page 5
a. Michael generally advised Hutton to have Township vehicles serviced by
MAB.
b. Michael occasionally directed that Township vehicles be serviced by SBS.
1. Michael would direct a Township vehicle be serviced by SBS when
Michael knew MAB could not complete the repair after diagnosing it
or if MAB was unable to successfully complete the repair.
20. Both MAB and SBS provide similar auto repair services.
a. MAB is located approximately three miles further from the Township building
than SBS.
b. Of the two businesses, only MAB is certified to complete state vehicle
inspections.
1. Some of the work performed by MAB included state inspections.
c. MAB has repaired Township vehicles in a more timely manner than SBS.
d. MAB and SBS are comparable in pricing.
e. Michael asserts that SBS had refused Township business in the past.
21. MAB and SBS have been performing repairs to Township owned vehicles since at
least 1997, as shown below:
1997* 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004* 2005*
MAB $18.62 $0.00 $17.99 $44.15 $0.00 $331.57 $449.05 $0.00 $777.56
SBS $1,296.50 $1,093.00 $412.50 $676.25 $120.00 $75.00 $65.00 $1,238.00 $100.15
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
MAB $1,422.39 $967.50 $827.06 $148.75 $146.50 $51.65
SBS $0.00 $0.00 $732.00 $0.00 $330.75 $0.00
MAB = Michael Auto Body
SBS = Stiver Auto Body
* Michael did not serve as a Supervisor during these years
a. As detailed above, SBS performed repair services for the Township in
consecutive years from 1997 to 2005.
1. SBS did not complete any work for the Township in 2006, 2007, 2009,
or 2011.
2. SBS completed approximately 50% of the Township vehicle repairs in
2008.
3. Michael has served continuously as a Supervisor since 2006.
b. MAB has performed the majority of vehicle repairs for the Township during
the last six years of Michael’s tenure as Supervisor, as shown below:
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total
MAB $1,422.39 $967.50 $827.06 $148.75 $146.50 $51.65 $3,563.85
SBS $0.00 $0.00 $732.00 $0.00 $330.75 $0.00 $1,062.75
Michael, 10-034
Page 6
1. Michael was not a part of the Board majority in 2008.
22. MAB was utilized for various vehicle repair services by the Township on no less
than twenty-one (21) occasions covering the time period of January 2006 through
March 2011.
a. Between January 2006 through March 2011, MAB invoiced the Township a
total of $2,662.50 in labor and $789.85 in material/parts.
1. In April 2007, Michael received payment in the amount of $111.50
and reflects a $110.00 charge for emergency snow removal.
23. One of the twenty-one (21) invoices submitted to the Township was in excess of the
$500.00 threshold requiring the awarding of the contract through an open and
public process pursuant to Section 1103(f) of the Pennsylvania Public Official and
Employee Ethics Act.
a. Invoice #6042 dated November 11, 2006, totaled $714.37.
1. Of that total, $464.37 was for materials.
2. Michael generally provided materials to the Township at cost.
b. The Township began seeking public bids for contracts in excess of $500.00
following the initiation of a PA State Ethics Commission investigation in 2009
of a former Supervisor for awarding contracts to a business that was owned
by members of his immediate family.
24. Michael, in his capacity as a Chest Township Supervisor, voted to approve sixteen
(16) of twenty (20) Township bill lists that documented payment to MAB.
25. Michael signed thirteen (13) of the twenty (20) Township checks as an authorized
Township signatory, which were issued to MAB during the time period of 2006 to
the present.
a. Checks signed by Michael totaled $2,519.39 in payment to MAB.
26. Michael and his wife, Sharon Michael, have maintained a joint bank account
(#1282XXX) at County National Bank (CNB) since at least June 28, 1989.
a. Michael and his wife have joint signature authority over the account.
b. The account served as a business account as of March 15, 2005.
27. CNB records for business account #1282XXX for the period January 2006 through
the present reflect the deposit of seventeen (17) Township checks issued to MAB
for vehicle repairs totaling $2,426.46.
a. CNB confirmed that bank records for account #1282XXX, spanning June 20,
2006, to February 2, 2007, did not reflect Township checks issued to MAB
deposited during the time period of June 20, 2006, through February 2,
2007, as follows:
Check Date Check # Check Amount
10-11-06 2586 $308.47
11-20-06 2600 $714.37
Michael, 10-034
Page 7
12-14-06 2603 $114.55
Total:$1,137.39
28. MAB invoices issued to the Township reflect that Michael charged the Township
between $25.00 to $30.00 an hour for labor.
a. Michael charges private MAB customers the same hourly labor rate as he
did the Township.
29. Since becoming aware of Ethics Commission investigations in Chest Township
many repairs made to Township vehicles by Michael have been done in his
capacity as working Supervisor.
a. The repairs that have been done as MAB relate to inspection type work.
1. Services performed as Working Supervisor include welding of trucks
and heavy equipment.
b. Michael is paid the labor rate as set by the Township auditors to complete
any repairs.
30. Michael’s Township time cards reflect that from 2007 to the present, Michael, as a
Working Supervisor, performed mechanical services to Township
vehicles/equipment for a total of twenty-three (23) hours, as shown below:
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
13 hours 3 hours 0 hours 3 hours 4 hours
31. Michael was compensated a total of $205.75 for performing the mechanical
services as a Working Supervisor.
a. If charging his private repair rate as MAB, Michael would have been paid
$575 (23 hours @ $25.00/hr).
32. On August 23, 2011, Michael provided a sworn statement to Commission
Investigators which included the following:
a. He generally directed Hutton to have Township vehicle repairs completed by
MAB.
1. He did not consider the use of SBS unless he could not perform the
repair himself.
2. He did not refuse Township vehicle repair work no matter how busy
MAB was at the time.
b. He directed repairs to be completed by MAB in order to have the repairs
completed in a timely manner, and to provide a believed cost saving benefit
to the Township.
c. He usually charged the Township cost for the materials he used to perform
the repairs.
1. On three (3) separate occasions (spanning the time frame of 2006 to
the present) he charged the Township above cost for materials
utilized.
Michael, 10-034
Page 8
d. He did not become aware of the $500.00 open and public bidding
requirement of the Ethics Act until approximately 2009.
e. Prior to 2009, he voted to approve bill lists that authorized payment to his
business and signed Township checks drafted to him and/or his business.
1. He is currently abstaining from bill lists that include payment to his
business and likewise attempts to avoid executing checks issued to
him and/or his business.
f. Since becoming aware of the Commission’s investigation, he has been
making repairs to Township vehicles as a Working Supervisor and not as
Owner/Operator of MAB.
1. His Working Supervisor wage is approximately fifteen to twenty
dollars less per hour than what he would charge to do the repair as
an employee of MAB.
33. Michael was aware that he and/or MAB would receive a monetary payment from the
Township for performing repairs on Township vehicles.
a. At the time Michael authorized Hutton to have MAB perform repair services
on Township vehicles, Michael intended to submit invoices for payment to
the Township.
b. While participating as a Township Supervisor in the discussions and/or
actions of the Board, including reviewing and voting on bill lists which
included invoices and requests for payment from MAB, Michael was aware
that an approval by the Township would result in a financial gain to himself
and/or MAB.
c. Michael was aware that by directing Township employees to have MAB
perform Township vehicle repair work, he and/or MAB would receive a
financial gain.
34. At least 25% of the hourly rate charged by Michael to the Township was overhead
for his business.
35. Between 2006 and March 2011, MAB received payments from the Township for
repairs performed on Township vehicles.
a. Of the $3,563.85, Michael/MAB billed $2,662.50 for labor.
b. Parts totaled $901.35.
c. Michael’s Working Supervisor pay rate for repairs would have totaled
$369.25.
d. Michael and/or MAB realized a financial benefit.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO MICHAEL’S FAILURE TO FILE
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FORMS
FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2006 AND 2008
Michael, 10-034
Page 9
36. Section 1104(a) of the State Ethics Act sets forth that public officials are to file a
Statement of Financial Interests (hereafter, “SFI”) form with the governing authority
st
of the political subdivision within which appointed or elected no later than May 1 of
each year that the individual holds such a position and of the year after the
individual leaves such a position.
a. Michael has served as a Chest Township Supervisor from January 3, 2006,
to the present.
37. On October 2, 2009, a Statement of Financial Interests Compliance Review of the
Township was conducted by the Investigative Division.
38. Statements of Financial Interests on file with Chest Township for Michael include
the following:
a. Calendar year Date filed
2005 2-10-2005
2007 4-10-2008
2009 2-01-2010
39. No Statements of Financial Interests were located at the Township building for
Michael for calendar years 2006 and 2008.
40. Michael received compensation as a Supervisor for Chest Township in calendar
years 2007 and 2009 although Michael had no Statement of Financial Interests
on file with the Township for the 2006 and 2008 calendar years.
a. Michael was paid quarterly in his position as Supervisor and received
additional payments for serving in other Township capacities, such as, Road
Master, Working Supervisor, etc.
b. Supervisors are compensated at the rate of $35.00 per meeting attended.
III.DISCUSSION:
As a Supervisor for Chest Township (“Township”), Clearfield County, from January
3, 2006, to the present, Respondent Carl Michael, hereinafter also referred to as
“Respondent,” “Respondent Michael,” and “Michael,” has been a public officialsubject 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 Michael violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a),
and 1104(d) of the Ethics Act: (1) when he used the authority of his public position for the
private pecuniary benefit of himself and/or a business with which he is associated,
“Michael Auto Body” (“MAB”), by authorizing repairs to Township vehicles to be done at his
business; (2) when he subsequently voted to approve payments to his company; and (3)
when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests (“SFIs”) for the 2006 and 2008
calendar years.
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.
Michael, 10-034
Page 10
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a).
The term "conflict" or "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.
Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act provides that no public official shall be allowed to
take the oath of office, enter or continue upon his duties, or receive compensation from
public funds unless he has filed an SFI as required by the Ethics Act.
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.
Respondent has served as a Township Supervisor from January 3, 2006, to the
present. Respondent previously served as a Township Supervisor from 1998 to 2003.
Respondent has served as Chairman of the Township Board of Supervisors (“Board”) from
2010 to the present. Respondent served as Vice-Chairman of the Board in 2006 and
2007. The Board consists of three Members.
Respondent has served as an appointed working Supervisor from 2006 to the
present. The pay rate set by the Township Auditors for working Supervisors has been
$8.50 per hour in 2006 and 2007, $9.00 per hour in 2008 and 2009, and $9.75 per hour in
2010 and 2011.
Additionally, Respondent was appointed to serve as one of the Township Road
Masters from 1998 to 2007 and in 2009.
In a private capacity, Respondent is the sole owner and operator of MAB, a vehicle
repair business. MAB and Stiver Body Shop (“SBS”) are the only two vehicle repair
Michael, 10-034
Page 11
businesses located within the geographical boundaries of the Township. MAB is the only
business within the geographical boundaries of the Township that is certified to perform
state vehicle inspections.
The Township Supervisors have attempted to utilize businesses located within the
geographical boundaries of the Township as much as possible.
Township employee Kevin Hutton (“Hutton”) has served as a Township Road
Master since at least 1998. Hutton, as Road Master, is responsible for arranging for
repairs and maintenance of Township vehicles.
Township procedures regarding the repair of Township vehicles are as follows.
Hutton initially attempts to repair the Township vehicle with the assistance of the road
crew. Hutton informs the first available Supervisor of any vehicle repairs that cannot be
completed by Hutton or members of the road crew. The Supervisor contacted by Hutton
selects a vendor where the vehicle should be serviced and notifies Hutton of the decision.
Quotes and/or bids are not solicited by the Supervisor(s) prior to determining where the
Township vehicle should be serviced. The Supervisor’s decision to choose one mechanic
shop over another is typically based upon personal preference.
Between 2006 and 2009, Hutton usually contacted either Respondent or then
Supervisor Leroy Brink (“Brink”) to advise them of needed vehicle repairs. Brink never
recommended that Township vehicles be taken to MAB for repairs. When contacted by
Hutton, Respondent generally advised Hutton to have Township vehicles serviced by MAB.
Respondent would direct that a Township vehicle be serviced by SBS when MAB could not
complete the repair.
MAB was utilized by the Township for various vehicle repair services on no less
than 21 occasions covering the time period of January 2006 through March 2011. From
January 2006 through March 2011, MAB invoiced the Township a total of $2,662.50 in
labor and $789.85 in material/parts. Respondent charged the Township between $25.00
to $30.00 an hour for labor, which was significantly higher than his hourly rate as a working
Supervisor. At least 25% of the hourly rate charged by Respondent to the Township was
overhead for his business. Respondent generally provided materials to the Township at
cost.
In April 2007 Respondent received payment in the amount of $111.50, which
reflected a $110.00 charge for emergency snow removal.
From 2006 through March 2011, MAB received payments from the Township for the
aforesaid charges totaling $3,563.85. Fact Findings 22-22a(1), 35-35b. Of that amount,
the charges for 2006 through 2009 totaled $3,365.70, and the charges for 2010 and 2011
totaled $198.15. Fact Finding 21.
The Board approves the payment of Township bills by voting to approve bill lists.
All three Supervisors maintain signature authority over the Township’s financial accounts.
Two signatures are required on all checks issued by the Township.
Respondent, in his capacity as a Township Supervisor, voted to approve 16 of 20
Township bill lists that documented payment to MAB. Respondent signed as an
authorized Township signatory 13 of the 20 Township checks issued to MAB during the
time period of 2006 to the present. Checks signed by Respondent in payment to MAB
totaled $2,519.39.
Respondent was aware that he and/or MAB would receive a monetary payment from
the Township for performing repairs on Township vehicles. At the time Respondent
authorized Hutton to have MAB perform repair services on Township vehicles, Respondent
Michael, 10-034
Page 12
intended to submit invoices for payment to the Township. While participating as a
Township Supervisor in the discussions and/or actions of the Board, including reviewing
and voting on bill lists that included invoices and requests for payment from MAB,
Respondent was aware that an approval by the Township would result in a financial gain to
him and/or MAB. Respondent was aware that by directing Township employees to have
MAB perform Township vehicle repair work, he and/or MAB would receive a financial gain.
The parties have stipulated that Respondent and/or MAB realized a financial benefit.
With regard to Respondent’s SFIs, on October 2, 2009, an SFI Compliance Review
of the Township was conducted by the Investigative Division. No SFIs were located at the
Township building for Respondent for calendar years 2006 and 2008. Respondent
received compensation as a Township Supervisor in calendar years 2007 and 2009
although he had no SFIs on file with the Township for the 2006 and 2008 calendar years.
Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply
the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case.
The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations
as follows:
3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in
relation to the above allegations:
a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1103(a) occurred when Michael, acting in his
official capacity as a Township Supervisor,
authorized repairs be made to Township
vehicles at a business with which he is
associated, Michael Auto Body; and
b. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1103(a) occurred when Michael, acting in his
official capacity as a Township Supervisor,
approved payments to Michael Auto Body, a
business with which he is associated; and
c. That a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1104(a) occurred in relation to Michael’s failure
to file Statements of Financial Interests for the
2006 and 2008 calendar years.
4. Michael agrees to make payment in the amount of $1,000.00
in settlement of this matter payable to the Chest Township and
forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter.
5. Michael agrees to file Statements of Financial Interests with
Chest Township, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics
Commission, for calendar years 2006 and 2008 within thirty
(30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter.
Michael, 10-034
Page 13
6. Michael agrees to not accept any reimbursement,
compensation or other payment from Chest Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid
in settlement of this matter.
7. 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
parties for a finding that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when
Respondent, acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor, authorized repairs to
be made to Township vehicles at MAB.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings, it was Respondent who selected MAB to
perform vehicle repair work for the Township on most if not all of the occasions MAB was
used by the Township between 2006 and 2009. See, Fact Findings 18-19b(1).
Respondent used the authority of his public office as a Township Supervisor when he
authorized repairs to be made to Township vehicles at MAB. But for being a Township
Supervisor, Respondent would not have been in a position to select a vendor to perform
vehicle repair services for the Township.
Respondent was aware that by directing Township employees to have MAB perform
Township vehicle repair work, he and/or MAB would receive a financial gain.
From 2006 through March 2011, MAB received payments from the Township for
charges totaling $3,563.85, which included: (1) $2,662.50 for labor and $789.85 for
materials/parts; and (2) $111.50, of which at least $110.00 related to emergency snow
removal. Of the total amount, the charges for 2006 through 2009 totaled $3,365.70. As
the owner/operator of MAB, Respondent charged the Township between $25.00 to $30.00
an hour for labor, which was significantly higher than his hourly rate as a working
Supervisor. At least 25% of the hourly rate charged by Respondent to the Township was
overhead for his business. Respondent and/or MAB realized a financial benefit from the
aforesaid work performed for the Township.
Based upon the above, we accept the recommendation of the parties, and we hold
that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when
Respondent, acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor, authorized repairs to
be made to Township vehicles at a business with which he is associated, Michael Auto
Body. Cf., Luzier, Order 1300.
We further accept the recommendation of the parties for a finding that a violation of
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Respondent, acting in his official capacity
as a Township Supervisor, approved payments to MAB.
Respondent, in his capacity as a Township Supervisor, voted to approve 16 of 20
Township bill lists that documented payment to MAB. Respondent signed as an
authorized Township signatory 13 of the 20 Township checks issued to MAB during the
Michael, 10-034
Page 14
time period of 2006 to the present. Checks signed by Respondent in payment to MAB
totaled $2,519.39.
While participating as a Township Supervisor in the discussions and/or actions of
the Board, including reviewing and voting on bill lists that included invoices and requests
for payment from MAB, Respondent was aware that an approval by the Township would
result in a financial gain to him and/or MAB.
We hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a),
occurred when Respondent, acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor,
approved payments to Michael Auto Body, a business with which he is associated. Cf.,
Luzier, supra; Schell, Order 1584.
As for the allegations regarding Respondent’s SFIs, we hold that a violation of
Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred in relation to
Respondent’s failure to file SFIs for the 2006 and 2008 calendar years. It appears that the
Investigative Division in the exercise of its prosecutorial discretion has elected to non pros
the portion of the allegations pertaining to Section 1104(d).
As part of the Consent Agreement, Respondent has agreed to make payment in the
amount of $1,000.00 in settlement of this matter payable to Chest Township and forwarded
to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter. Respondent has agreed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other
payment from Chest Township representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount
paid in settlement of this matter.
Respondent has further agreed to file SFIs for calendar years 2006 and 2008 with
Chest Township, through this Commission, within thirty (30) days of the date of the
issuance of the final adjudication of this matter.
We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth a
proper disposition for this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis
and the totality of the facts and circumstances.
Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent is directed to
make payment in the amount of $1,000.00 payable to Chest Township and forwarded to
th
this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this
adjudication and Order.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent is further directed to not
accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from Chest Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
To the extent he has not already done so, Respondent is directed to file SFIs for
calendar years 2006 and 2008 with Chest Township, through this Commission, by no later
th
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 Supervisor for Chest Township (“Township”), Clearfield County, from January
3, 2006, to the present, Carl Michael (“Michael”) has been a public officialsubject to
the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65
Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
Michael, 10-034
Page 15
2. Michael violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he,
acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor, authorized repairs to be
made to Township vehicles at a business with which he is associated, Michael Auto
Body.
3. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Michael, acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor, approved
payments to Michael Auto Body, a business with which he is associated.
4. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred in
relation to Michael’s failure to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2006 and
2008 calendar years.
In Re: Carl Michael, : File Docket: 10-034
Respondent : Date Decided: 1/30/12
: Date Mailed: 2/14/12
ORDER NO. 1596
1. As a Supervisor for Chest Township (“Township”), Clearfield County, Carl Michael
(“Michael”) violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act
(“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he, acting in his official capacity as a
Township Supervisor, authorized repairs to be made to Township vehicles at a
business with which he is associated, Michael Auto Body.
2. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Michael, acting in his official capacity as a Township Supervisor, approved
payments to Michael Auto Body, a business with which he is associated.
3. A violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred in
relation to Michael’s failure to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2006 and
2008 calendar years.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Michael is directed to make payment in
the amount of $1,000.00 payable to Chest Township 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. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Michael is further directed to not accept
any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from Chest Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this
matter.
6. To the extent he has not already done so, Michael is directed to file Statements of
Financial Interests for calendar years 2006 and 2008 with Chest Township, through
th
the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30) day
after the mailing date of this Order.
7. Compliance with Paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 of this Order will result in the closing of this
case with no further action by this Commission.
a. Non-compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
___________________________
Louis W. Fryman, Chair