HomeMy WebLinkAbout1618 Stinson
In Re: Denise H. Stinson, : File Docket: 12-015
Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1618
: Date Decided: 7/9/13
: Date Mailed: 7/12/13
Before: John J. Bolger, Chair
Nicholas A. Colafella, Vice Chair
Raquel K. Bergen
Mark R. Corrigan
Roger Nick
Kathryn Streeter Lewis
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.” A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement 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 Denise Stinson, a public official/public employee in her capacity as a Member
of Yeadon Borough Council, Delaware County, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1105(b) of
the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a) and 1105(b), when she used
the authority of her public position to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for herself and/or
members of her immediate family by using her position to receive payment from the
Borough for the costs of private health insurance; and when she subsequently participated
in actions of Council to approve payments issued to her for private health care insurance
costs; and when she failed to disclose on a Statement of Financial Interests filed for the
2011 calendar year real estate interests, creditors, direct and/or indirect sources of
income, gifts, transportation, lodging and hospitality, financial interests in any legal entity
for profit and business interests transferred to immediate family members.
II.FINDINGS:
1. Denise Stinson has served as a Council Member for Yeadon Borough, Delaware
County, from January 4, 2010, through the present.
a. Stinson was elected to Council during a special election held in November
2009.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 2
b. Stinson has served as President of Yeadon Borough Council from August
2012 until the present.
2. Yeadon was incorporated as a Borough in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, on
March 9, 1893.
a. According to the United States Census Bureau, the population of Yeadon
Borough was 11,443 at the 2010 census.
3. Yeadon Borough is governed by a seven-Member Council and Mayor.
a. Historically, Council will hold two (2) meetings each month.
1. Council holds workshop meetings on the first Thursday of each
month.
2. Council holds legislative meetings on the third Thursday of each
month.
3. Council holds special meetings as necessary.
4. Compensation to be received by Members of Borough Council is capped by the
Borough Code, 53 P.S. § 45101 et seq.
a. Borough Council Member compensation is determined by the Borough’s
population.
b. Specifically, the Borough Code reads:
Members of council may receive compensation to be fixed by ordinance as
follows:
(1) In boroughs with a population of less than five thousand, a maximum of
eighteen hundred seventy-five dollars ($ 1875) a year.
(2) In boroughs with a population of five thousand or more but less than ten
thousand, a maximum of two thousand five hundred dollars ($ 2500) a year.
(3) In boroughs with a population of ten thousand or more but less than
fifteen thousand, a maximum of three thousand two hundred fifty dollars ($
3250) a year.
(4) In boroughs with a population of fifteen thousand or more but less than
twenty-five thousand, a maximum of four thousand one hundred twenty-five
dollars ($ 4125) a year.
(5) In boroughs with a population of twenty-five thousand or more but less
than thirty-five thousand, a maximum of four thousand three hundred
seventy-five dollars ($ 4375) a year.
(6) In boroughs with a population of thirty-five thousand or more, a maximum
of five thousand dollars ($ 5000) a year.
The salaries shall be payable monthly or quarterly for the duties imposed by
the provisions of this act.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 3
Benefits provided to members of council under section 1202(26) shall not be
considered pay, salary or compensation, but payment for all or a part of the
premiums or charges for the benefits shall be in accordance with section
1202(26).
Any change in salary, compensation or emoluments of the elected office
shall become effective at the beginning of the next term of the member of
council.
53 P.S. § 46001.
5. Council Members are compensated at a scale of $150.00 monthly ($1,800.00
annually) for their service.
a. The population of Yeadon Borough is 11,443, which would make Council
Members eligible to receive compensation of $3,250 per year.
b. Attendance at the monthly Council meeting is not required in order for
Council Members to receive compensation.
c. Per the Borough Code (53 P.S. § 46001), Council Members of Yeadon
Borough could be compensated a maximum of $3,250.00.
6. In addition to compensation allowed for by law, Members of Borough Council are
eligible to participate in Borough-funded insurance programs.
a. The pertinent portion of the Borough Code regarding Council Members’
participation in Borough-funded insurance plans is found at 53 P.S. §
46202(26), which reads:
(26) OTHER INSURANCE.
(i) Workers’ compensation insurance. To appropriate an amount as may
be necessary to secure insurance or compensation in accordance
with Article VI of the act of June 2, 1915 (P.L. 736, No. 338), known
as the “Workers’ Compensation Act,” for:
(A) volunteer fire fighters of companies duly recognized by the
borough, by motion or resolution, killed or injured while going
to, returning from, or attending fires, or while performing their
duties as special fire police; and
(B) other borough employes as “employe” is defined in section 601
of the “Workers’ Compensation Act.”
(ii) Life and health insurance. To make contracts of insurance with any
insurance company, association or exchange, authorized to transact
business in the Commonwealth, insuring borough employes, or any
class or classes of employes, or mayor and council, or their
dependents, under a policy or policies of insurance covering life,
health, hospitalization, medical and surgical service or accident
insurance.
(iii) Pension contracts. To contract with an insurance company, granting
annuities or pensions, for the pensioning of borough employes, or any
class, or classes of employes, and to agree to pay part or all of the
Stinson, 12-015
Page 4
premiums or charges for carrying the contracts, and to appropriate
moneys from the borough treasury for such purposes.
(iv) Liability insurance. To make contracts with any insurance company,
association or exchange, authorized to transact business in this
Commonwealth, insuring any public liability of the borough, and to
appropriate moneys from the borough treasury for such purpose.
(v) Nothing in this clause shall affect any contract, right or coverage of
insurance vested or existing on the effective date of this clause.
Contract, as used in this clause, includes an annuity contract,
provided that the option to renew continues to provide the same rights
to the annuitant that existed on the effective date of this clause.
53 P.S. § 46202(26) (emphasis added).
7. Yeadon Borough provides health insurance coverage for its employees through a
policy managed by Independence Blue Cross.
a. Participants in the Borough’s insurance plan pay no insurance premium.
b. The Borough policy consists of two (2) groups: the Police policy group, and
all other Borough employees.
1. The Borough’s Employee (non-police) group consists of no less than
fourteen (14) members.
8. Upon amendment of the Borough Code in 2001, which amongst other provisions,
allowed the participation of Council Members in a Borough-funded health insurance
program, Yeadon Borough permitted elected officials to receive/participate in the
same insurance benefit program that was otherwise provided to Borough
employees.
a. During calendar year 2010, only one Member of Council participated in the
Borough’s health insurance plan.
9. In or around 2008, Council reviewed the Borough’s health insurance costs, and
noted that the cost for Council Members’ health insurance was projected to exceed
$64,000.00 for fiscal year 2009.
a. Yeadon Borough Council adopted a budget for fiscal year 2008 at the end of
calendar year 2007, that included a total of $22,762 for Borough-provided
health insurance benefits.
1. Actual costs for health insurance benefits for the year 2007 were
$29,521.84.
b. The costs exceeded budgeted funds due to some Council Members
participating in a family coverage plan.
10. As part of a cost-savings attempt, in 2008 Council directed Interim Borough
Manager Paul Janssen to prepare a Resolution for Borough adaptation which
limited/capped the costs of benefits provided to Yeadon Borough Council Members.
a. All matters involving a financial expenditure with Yeadon Borough are first
presented and reviewed by the Manager and Finance Director.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 5
11. All Members of Council present at a meeting are to participate in voting on motions
presented.
a. The Mayor votes only in the case of a tie.
12. Council’s voting procedures on matters involving financial expenditures or accounts
payable occur in roll call fashion.
a. Votes on all other matters occur via a group “YES/NO” manner.
b. All objections and/or abstentions are noted within the minutes.
13. On December 18, 2008, Yeadon Borough Council President Vivian Ford requested
Council to consider a Resolution which would limit Council health insurance costs
to less than $5,000.00.
a. Meeting minutes for December 18, 2008, reflect the following:
President Ford asked Council to receive and consider a
resolution to restrict the compensation Borough Council
members can receive as part of Borough paid health benefits
to $5,000
Upon Motion of Vice President Byrne and Seconded by
councilor McDonald the adoption of a resolution to
restrict the compensation Borough Council members
can receive as part of Borough paid health benefits to
$5,000 was accepted unanimously by a vote of 6 to 0.
b. Actual language of the approved Resolution No. 2008-12 reads, in pertinent
part:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
that the Yeadon Borough Council,
Delaware County, Pennsylvania, hereby restricts the costs which Councilors
and the Mayor may incur utilizing benefits as an elected official to $5,000 per
TH
RESOLVED AND ENACTED THIS 18 DAY OF
official per year, and
DECEMBER 2008.
14. Resolution No. 2008-12 does not authorize elected officials of Yeadon Borough to
be reimbursed for their private insurance or insurance provided through an
employer or other entity.
15. Yeadon Borough never enacted or established any type of policy that authorized
elected officials to be reimbursed for their private insurance or insurance provided
through an employer or other entity in lieu of enrolling/participating in a Borough-
funded health insurance program.
16. Following the 2009 special election, and prior to Stinson taking office, Council
Member Delores Jones-Butler approached Stinson and informed her that as a
newly-elected Council Member, she was entitled to receive compensation as
delineated in the Borough Code, including the option of participating in the
Borough’s health insurance program.
17. Following Stinson’s installment as a Council Member for Yeadon Borough, Jones –
Butler again informed Stinson that as an elected official of Yeadon Borough, she
(Stinson) had the option of receiving insurance benefits at Borough expense.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 6
a. Jones-Butler informed Stinson that she (Stinson) could either participate in
the Borough-funded health insurance plan or be reimbursed by the Borough
for health insurance expenses, up to $5,000.00 annually.
b. Stinson opted not to participate in the Borough-provided health insurance
benefit plan offered to employees/elected officials.
1. Stinson was not an employee of Yeadon Borough.
c. Stinson did not seek immediate reimbursement for costs associated with her
employer-provided health insurance, because she believed that she was not
incurring any reimbursable expenses.
18. In a non-governmental capacity, Stinson has been employed as a Unit Facilitator
for Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital for at least the past 33 years.
a. As an employee of Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital, Stinson received as part of her
compensation a salary and benefits.
b. Stinson’s insurance benefits were provided to her as an employee of Mercy
Fitzgerald Hospital by way of payroll deductions.
1. Stinson’s biweekly pay reflected deductions for health insurance
benefits.
19. The costs of Stinson’s insurance benefits, as deducted from her pay with Mercy
Fitzgerald Hospital, totaled approximately $312.37 per month (deducted biweekly),
and as of December 2009, totaled as follows:
a. Low PPO EE: $100.00; Dental-Concordia Prem-EE: $27.00; Supplemental
Life: $3.82; Voluntary Benefits: $12.92; for a total deduction of $143.74
(biweekly).
b. These deductions are in addition to health insurance benefit costs paid by
Stinson’s employer.
20. On August 19, 2010, Janssen was removed as the Interim Borough Manager by a
majority vote of the Yeadon Borough Council.
a. Stinson voted in favor of Janssen’s removal.
b. The position of Borough Manager remained vacant from August 2010 until
approximately April 2011.
21. Following Janssen’s removal from office, on or around December 31, 2010, Stinson
provided a copy of her pay statement and employer-provided benefit information
to Yeadon Borough Finance Director Tyrone Jordan.
a. Stinson provided the information to Jordan in order to secure reimbursement
from Yeadon Borough for the costs associated with Stinson’s employer-
provided health insurance.
b. Reimbursements could not be made by the Borough without the pay
statements being provided by Stinson.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 7
22. Stinson previously declined to receive Borough-provided health insurance and was
informed by Janssen that non-out of pocket expenses for health care
costs/insurance were not eligible for reimbursement from the Borough.
a. It was only after Janssen was terminated that Stinson sought reimbursement.
b. Stinson waited until Janssen was terminated before she sought
reimbursement for employer-provided health care costs, since Janssen
previously informed her that her expenses were ineligible for reimbursement
from the Borough.
c. Stinson sought reimbursement after being advised by Borough Council
Member Sandra Thomas that she was getting reimbursement for insurance
benefits.
23. Either Yeadon Borough Finance Clerk Sheila Briner or Finance Director Tyrone
Jordan initiated reimbursement payments to Stinson following receipt of Stinson’s
pay statements.
a. Stinson provided payroll information that enabled her to receive retroactive
reimbursements.
24. Payments for health insurance reimbursements were placed on accounts payable
lists for Council approval at regular legislative meetings of Council.
a. Council receives the accounts payable lists prior to monthly meetings in
meeting packets.
b. The accounts payable lists represent expenditures not yet paid by the
Borough.
25. On March 18, 2011, Stinson received two (2) retroactive reimbursement payments
from Yeadon Borough, as reimbursement for her (Stinson’s) employer-provided
health insurance costs.
a. The first March 18, 2011, reimbursement payment totaled $3,748.42, and
represented payment in the amount of $312.37 for twelve (12) months
($3,748.42 ÷ 12 ≈ $312.37) and represented payment for the year 2010.
b. The second March 18, 2011, reimbursement payment totaled $937.11, and
represented payment in the amount of $312.37 for three (3) months ($937.11
÷ 3 = $312.37) and represented payment for January, February and March
2011.
c. Stinson began receiving regular monthly payments in the amount of $312.37
beginning in April 2011.
26. Stinson received payments from Yeadon Borough for the reimbursement of her
insurance benefits provided to her as an employee of Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital.
a. Payments made to Stinson on March 18, 2011, were for insurance
reimbursements for the entire year of 2010 and for the first three (3) months
of 2011.
b. Stinson abstained from voting on all motions to approve reimbursements for
her insurance benefits other than the last payment made on May 20, 2011,
which was approved at the legislative meeting on June 16, 2011.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 8
27. Stinson continued to receive “reimbursement” payments on a monthly basis, as a
result of Borough Council actions approving the accounts payable lists at the
monthly meetings.
a. Beginning on April 21, 2011, Yeadon Borough Council initiated the practice
of approving separate motions regarding the voting to approve
reimbursement of employer-provided insurance benefits, in order to allow the
affected Council Member to abstain from voting.
1. Stinson abstained from voting to approve Borough payments issued
to herself during/after the April 21, 2011, Yeadon Borough Council
meeting.
28. Concerns were raised by citizens of Yeadon Borough regarding the
appropriateness of Council Members being reimbursed for employer-provided
health insurance …. [Redacted due to confidentiality requirements of the Ethics
Act.]
29. [Redacted due to confidentiality requirements of the Ethics Act.]
30. Following the questions being raised regarding Yeadon Borough providing
employer health costs reimbursement to its Council Members, Council enacted
Resolution No. 2011-09, on July 21, 2011, restricting the value of the
reimbursement, which read in part:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED
, effective for the Calendar year of 2011 and
going forward, the Yeadon Borough Council shall restrict the value of the health
insurance, accident insurance, and life insurance benefits per official per year to an
amount not to exceed the single rate (no children) premium of the health insurance
ST
RESOLVED THIS 21 DAY OF
plan provided to non-union Borough employees.
JULY 2011
a. Resolution No. 2011-09 regarding health care costs for Council Members
and the Mayor was approved at the regular legislative meeting on July 21,
2011, by a 6-0 vote in which Stinson participated in approving the resolution.
31. Following the enactment of Resolution No. 2011-09, Stinson opted not to be
included as part of the Yeadon Borough insurance plan available to officials and
employees of the Borough.
a. Stinson discontinued collecting the $312.37 monthly “reimbursement” from
the Borough following the enactment of Resolution No. 2011-09 on July 21,
2011.
32. [Redacted due to confidentiality requirements of the Ethics Act.]
33. Stinson realized a private pecuniary benefit in her capacity as a Yeadon Borough
Council Member, as a result of being reimbursed by Yeadon Borough for insurance
benefits that were provided to Stinson through her employer, Mercy Fitzgerald
Hospital.
a. Stinson opted not to participate in the health insurance plan offered by the
Borough.
b. Stinson provided an Annual Benefits Enrollment Statement, issued to her by
her employer Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital, to Finance Director Tyrone Jordan
Stinson, 12-015
Page 9
with the intent of being reimbursed by Yeadon Borough for her employer-
provided health insurance costs.
The following findings relate to the allegation that Stinson failed to disclose on her
Statement of Financial Interests filed for the 2011 calendar year real estate interests,
creditors, direct/indirect sources of income, gifts, transportation, lodging and
hospitality, financial interests in any legal entity for profit, and business interests
transferred to immediate family members.
34. Pursuant to the Statement of Financial Interests filing requirements for public
officials and public employees of Section 1104 of the State Ethics Act, Stinson was
required to file an accurate and complete Statement of Financial Interests by May
st
1 annually, in her capacity as a Yeadon Borough Council Member.
35. Stinson did not complete any of sections eight (8) through thirteen (13) of her
Statement of Financial Interests for the 2011 calendar year, and failed to list income
in excess of $1,300.00 from her employment with Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital and
from Yeadon Borough.
III.DISCUSSION:
As a Council Member for Yeadon Borough (“Borough”), Delaware County, from
January 4, 2010, through the present, Respondent Denise H. Stinson, also referred to
hereinafter as “Respondent,” “Respondent Stinson,” and “Stinson,” 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 Stinson violated Sections 1103(a) and 1105(b) of the Ethics
Act when she used the authority of her public position to obtain a private pecuniary benefit
for herself and/or members of her immediate family by using her position to receive
payment from the Borough for the costs of private health insurance; and when she
subsequently participated in actions of Borough Council to approve payments issued to
her for private health care insurance costs; and when she failed to disclose on a Statement
of Financial Interests (“SFI”) filed for the 2011 calendar year real estate interests,
creditors, direct and/or indirect sources of income, gifts, transportation, lodging and
hospitality, financial interests in any legal entity for profit, and business interests
transferred to immediate family members.
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
Stinson, 12-015
Page 10
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 1105(b) of the Ethics Act and its subsections detail the financial disclosure
that a person required to file the SFI form must provide.
Section 1105(b)(3) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any
direct or indirect interest in any real estate which was sold or leased to or purchased or
leased from the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions, or which was
the subject of any condemnation proceedings by the Commonwealth or any of its agencies
or political subdivisions.
Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(4) of the Ethics Act requires
the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in
excess of $6,500 and the interest rate thereon.
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 SFI the name and address
of any direct or indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate $1,300 or more.
Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(6) of the Ethics Act requires
the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of the source and the amount of any
gift or gifts valued in the aggregate at $250 or more and the circumstances of each gift.
Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(7) of the Ethics Act requires
the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of the source and the amount of any
payment for or reimbursement of actual expenses for transportation and lodging or
hospitality received in connection with public office or employment where such actual
expenses exceed $650 in an aggregate amount per year.
Section 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any
financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. S ection 1105(b)(10) of
the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any financial interest in a business
with which he is or has been associated in the preceding calendar year which has been
transferred to a member of his immediate family. The term “financial interest” is defined in
the Ethics Act as “[a]ny financial interest in a legal entity engaged in business for profit
which comprises more than 5% of the equity of the business or more than 5% of the assets
of the economic interest in indebtedness.” 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 11
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 seven-Member Council and a Mayor. Stinson was
elected to Borough Council during a special election held in November 2009, and she has
served as a Member of Borough Council from January 4, 2010, through the present.
Stinson has served as President of Borough Council from August 2012 until the present.
Borough Council Members are compensated $1,800.00 annually for their service and are
not required to be in attendance at monthly meetings in order to receive such
compensation.
With respect to insurance coverage for members of a borough council, the Borough
Code authorizes a borough to “make contracts of insurance with any insurance company,
association or exchange, authorized to transact business in the Commonwealth, insuring
borough employes, or any class or classes of employes, or mayor and council, or their
dependents, under a policy or policies of insurance covering life, health, hospitalization,
medical and surgical service or accident insurance.” 53 P.S. § 46202(26)(ii).
After the Borough Code was amended in 2001 to allow the participation of borough
council members in a borough-funded health insurance program, the Borough permitted
elected officials to receive/participate in the same insurance benefit program provided to
Borough employees. The Borough provides health insurance coverage for its employees
through a policy managed by Independence Blue Cross. Participants in the Borough’s
insurance plan pay no insurance premium.
In or around 2008, Borough Council reviewed the Borough’s health insurance costs
and noted that the cost for Council Members’ health insurance was projected to exceed
$64,000.00 for fiscal year 2009. As part of a cost-savings attempt, Borough Council
directed Interim Borough Manager Paul Janssen (“Janssen”) to prepare a Resolution
which limited/capped the costs of benefits provided to Borough Council Members.
On December 18, 2008, Borough Council adopted Resolution No. 2008-12, which
restricted the cost of Borough-paid health benefits for Borough Council Members and the
Mayor to $5,000 per elected official per year. Resolution No. 2008-12 does not authorize
elected officials of the Borough to be reimbursed for their private insurance or insurance
provided through an employer or other entity, and the Borough never enacted or
established any type of policy that authorized elected officials to be reimbursed for their
private insurance or insurance provided through an employer or other entity in lieu of
enrolling/participating in a Borough-funded health insurance program.
Stinson has been employed as a Unit Facilitator for Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital
(“Hospital”) for at least the past 33 years. As a Hospital employee, Stinson received as
part of her compensation insurance benefits that were provided to her by way of payroll
deductions. As of December 2009, the costs of Stinson’s insurance benefits as deducted
from her Hospital pay totaled approximately $312.37 per month.
After the special election in November 2009 and prior to Stinson taking office,
Borough Council Member Delores Jones-Butler (“Jones-Butler”) informed Stinson that as a
newly-elected Council Member, she was entitled to receive compensation as delineated in
the Borough Code and had the option to participate in the Borough’s health insurance
program. Following Stinson’s installment as a Council Member, Jones–Butler informed
Stinson that she could either participate in the Borough-funded health insurance plan or be
reimbursed by the Borough up to $5,000.00 annually for health insurance expenses.
Stinson opted not to participate in the Borough-funded health insurance plan, and
she did not seek immediate reimbursement for costs associated with her employer-
Stinson, 12-015
Page 12
provided health insurance because she believed that she was not incurring any
reimbursable expenses. Stinson had been informed by Janssen that non-out of pocket
expenses for health care costs/insurance were not eligible for reimbursement from the
Borough.
On August 19, 2010, Janssen was removed as the Interim Borough Manager by a
majority vote of the Borough Council. Stinson voted in favor of Janssen’s removal. The
position of Borough Manager remained vacant until approximately April 2011.
Following Janssen’s removal from office, on or around December 31, 2010, Stinson
provided a copy of her pay statement and employer-provided benefit information to
Borough Finance Director Tyrone Jordan (“Jordan”) in order to secure reimbursement from
the Borough for the costs associated with Stinson’s employer-provided health insurance.
Reimbursement could not be made by the Borough without Stinson’s pay statements.
Stinson sought reimbursement after being advised by Borough Council Member Sandra
Thomas that she was getting reimbursement for insurance benefits.
Either Jordan or Borough Finance Clerk Sheila Briner initiated reimbursement
payments to Stinson following receipt of Stinson’s pay statements. Payments for health
insurance reimbursements were placed on accounts payable lists for Borough Council
approval at regular legislative meetings of Council. The accounts payable lists represent
expenditures not yet paid by the Borough.
On March 18, 2011, Stinson received two retroactive reimbursement payments from
the Borough, as reimbursement in the amount of $312.37 per month for her employer-
provided health insurance costs. The first reimbursement payment totaled $3,748.42 and
represented payment for the year 2010. The second reimbursement payment totaled
$937.11 and represented payment for January, February and March 2011. Stinson began
receiving regular monthly payments in the amount of $312.37 beginning in April 2011.
Concerns were raised by Borough citizens regarding the appropriateness of Council
Members being reimbursed for employer-provided health insurance, and on July 21, 2011,
Stinson participated in a 6-0 Borough Council vote to approve Resolution No. 2011-09,
which restricted the yearly value of insurance benefits for Borough officials. Following the
enactment of Resolution No. 2011-09, Stinson opted not to be included as part of the
Borough insurance plan available to Borough officials and employees, and she
discontinued collecting the $312.37 monthly reimbursement payment from the Borough.
Stinson abstained from voting on all motions to approve reimbursements for her insurance
benefits other than the last payment made to her on May 20, 2011, which was approved at
the Borough Council legislative meeting on June 16, 2011.
The parties have stipulated that Stinson realized a private pecuniary benefit in her
capacity as a Borough Council Member as a result of being reimbursed by the Borough for
insurance benefits that were provided to her through her employer.
As for Stinson’s SFI for calendar year 2011, the parties have stipulated that Stinson
did not complete any of sections eight (8) through thirteen (13) of said SFI and that she
failed to list income in excess of $1,300.00 from the Borough and from her employment
with the Hospital.
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:
Stinson, 12-015
Page 13
3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in
relation to the above allegations:
a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a) occurred in relation to Stinson’s receipt
of payment from the Borough for the costs of
private health insurance; and when she
subsequently participated in actions of Council
to approve payments issued to her for private
health care insurance costs.
b. That a violation of Section 1105(b) [of the Ethics
Act] occurred when Stinson failed to disclose on
her 2011 calendar year Statement of Financial
Interests, her real estate interests, creditors,
direct and/or indirect sources of income, gifts,
transportation, lodging and hospitality, financial
interests in any legal entity for profit and
business interests transferred to immediate
family members.
4. Stinson agrees to make payment in the amount of $1,556.16 in
settlement of this matter payable to the Yeadon Borough and
forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter.
5. Stinson agrees to file a complete and accurate Statement of
Financial Interests with Yeadon Borough through the
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for the 2011 calendar
year within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final
adjudication in this matter.
6. Stinson agrees to not accept any reimbursement,
compensation or other payment from Yeadon Borough
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 of the parties, we accept the
recommendation of the parties for a finding that a violation of Section 1103(a) of Ethics Act
occurred in relation to Stinson’s receipt of payment from the Borough for the costs of
private health insurance; and when she subsequently participated in actions of Council to
approve payments issued to her for private health care insurance costs.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 14
But for being a Borough Council Member, Stinson would not have been in a position
to provide a copy of her pay statement and employer-provided benefit information to
Borough Finance Director Jordan in order to secure reimbursement from the Borough for
the costs associated with Stinson’s employer-provided health insurance. Stinson used the
authority of her public position as a Borough Council Member when she voted on the
motion to approve reimbursement for her insurance benefits at the Borough Council
legislative meeting on June 16, 2011. As detailed in Fact Findings 25 and 33, Stinson
realized a private pecuniary benefit as a result of receiving two retroactive reimbursement
payments and regular monthly payments from the Borough for her employer-provided
health insurance costs.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings and the Consent Agreement, we hold that a
violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Stinson’s receipt of
payment from the Borough for the costs of private health insurance; and when she
subsequently participated in actions of Council to approve payments issued to her for
private health care insurance costs.
As for the allegations regarding Stinson’s SFI for the 2011 calendar year, we hold
that Stinson violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), when she
failed to disclose on her 2011 calendar year SFI her real estate interests, creditors, direct
and/or indirect sources of income, gifts, transportation, lodging and hospitality, financial
interests in any legal entity for profit and business interests transferred to immediate family
members.
As part of the Consent Agreement, Stinson has agreed to make payment in the
amount of $1,556.16 payable to Yeadon Borough and forwarded to this Commission within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Stinson has agreed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other
payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid
in settlement of this matter.
Stinson has further agreed to file a complete and accurate SFI for the 2011
calendar year with the Borough, through this Commission, within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth 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, Stinson is directed to make
payment in the amount of $1,556.16 payable to Yeadon Borough and forwarded to this
th
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, Stinson is directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or
partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
Stinson is directed to file a complete and accurate SFI for the 2011 calendar year
th
with the Borough, through this Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the
mailing date of this adjudication and Order.
Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further
action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order
enforcement action.
Stinson, 12-015
Page 15
IV.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. As a Council Member for Yeadon Borough (“Borough”), Delaware County, from
January 4, 2010, through the present, Respondent Denise H. Stinson (“Stinson”)
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. Stinson violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation
to her receipt of payment from the Borough for the costs of private health insurance;
and when she subsequently participated in actions of Council to approve payments
issued to her for private health care insurance costs.
3. Stinson violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), when she
failed to disclose on her 2011 calendar year Statement of Financial Interests her
real estate interests, creditors, direct and/or indirect sources of income, gifts,
transportation, lodging and hospitality, financial interests in any legal entity for profit
and business interests transferred to immediate family members.
In Re: Denise H. Stinson, : File Docket: 12-015
Respondent : Date Decided: 7/9/13
: Date Mailed: 7/12/13
ORDER NO. 1618
1. As a Council Member for Yeadon Borough (“Borough”), Delaware County, Denise
H. Stinson (“Stinson”) violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to her receipt of payment
from the Borough for the costs of private health insurance; and when she
subsequently participated in actions of Council to approve payments issued to her
for private health care insurance costs.
2. Stinson violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), when she
failed to disclose on her 2011 calendar year Statement of Financial Interests (“SFI”)
her real estate interests, creditors, direct and/or indirect sources of income, gifts,
transportation, lodging and hospitality, financial interests in any legal entity for profit
and business interests transferred to immediate family members.
3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Stinson is directed to make payment in
the amount of $1,556.16 payable to Yeadon 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.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Stinson is directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a
full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
5. Stinson is directed to file a complete and accurate SFI for the 2011 calendar year
with the Borough, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, by no later
th
than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this Order.
6. Compliance with paragraphs 3, 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,
___________________________
John J. Bolger, Chair