HomeMy WebLinkAbout1648 Foster
In Re: Gary Foster, : File Docket: 13-015
Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1648
: Date Decided: 9/30/14
: Date Mailed: 10/21/14
Before: John J. Bolger, Chair
Nicholas A. Colafella, Vice Chair
Raquel K. Bergen
Mark R. Corrigan
Roger Nick
Kathryn Streeter Lewis
Maria Feeley
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 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 Gary Foster, a public official/public employee in his capacity as \[a\] Supervisor
for Wysox Township, Bradford County, violated \[Sections 1103(a), 1103(f), 1105(b)(5),
1105(b)(8), and 1105(b)(9)\] of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) when he utilized the
authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefit \[of\] himself, an immediate
family member and/or a business with which he and/or an immediate family member is
associated by awarding no-bid contracts to Township vendors/contractors and
subsequently serving as a subcontractor on those projects; when he approved payment of
invoices to the Township from said vendors/contractors; when he simultaneously claimed
Township salary/wage and conducted non-Roadmaster business, namely, furthering
personal business and serving as subcontractor on Township projects; when he utilized
Township equipment for non-Township purposes; when he awarded no-bid work and
payments to Foster Communications, a business with which a member of his immediate
family is associated; when he made purchases for personal use from the Federal Surplus
Property Program, which program is limited to governmental entities; and when he failed to
list all sources of income, any office, directorship, or employment in any business, and his
financial interest in any \[legal entity engaged in business for profit\] on Statement of
Financial Interests forms filed for calendar years 2008 through 2012.
II.FINDINGS:
Foster, 13-015
Page 2
1. Gary Foster (“Foster”) has served as a Member of the Wysox Township Board of
Supervisors (“Board of Supervisors”) since approximately January 5, 1992.
a. Foster was annually appointed/reappointed as Roadmaster by the Board of
Supervisors on January 7, 2008, January 5, 2009, January 4, 2010, January
3, 2011, January 3, 2012, and January 7, 2013.
1. Foster served as Roadmaster until his resignation from the position
effective October 28, 2013.
b. By way of correspondence dated October 28, 2013, Foster informed the
Board of Supervisors that he was “retiring from the position of Road
Foreman.”
c. Foster did not cite any reason for his retirement but indicated that he would
continue to serve on the Board of Supervisors for the remainder of his
elected term.
2. As Roadmaster, Foster was responsible for the general care and maintenance of
Township roads, equipment, and facilities.
a. Foster possessed the authority to select, hire, and schedule private
contractors for Township road projects.
b. Foster possessed the authority to make purchases on behalf of the
Township consistent with the provisions of Township Resolution 96R-2.
c. Foster was authorized to schedule part-time road workers on an as-needed
basis.
d. Foster would regularly provide the Board of Supervisors with a Monthly
Roadmaster’s Report during public meetings. This report served to update
the Board and public of major Road Department activities for the prior month.
3. Wysox Township (“Township”) is a Second Class Township governed by a three (3)
Member Board of Supervisors.
4. Privately, Foster has owned and operated Gary Foster Construction for
approximately the past thirty (30) years.
a. Gary Foster Construction provides tri-axle hauling and excavation services.
b. Gary Foster Construction is not registered with the Pennsylvania Department
of State as either an incorporated entity or a fictitious name.
c. Assets of Gary Foster Construction are held either individually by Foster or
jointly with his wife, Alice Foster.
1. Alice Foster provides bookkeeping functions for the business.
5. Foster, in his official capacities as a Supervisor and Roadmaster, had the ability to
make purchases on behalf of the Township without prior Board authorization.
a. Purchases were to be made consistent with Township Resolution 96R-2,
effective February 6, 1996.
Foster, 13-015
Page 3
6. Township Resolution 96R-2 authorized the Roadmaster to make purchases up to
$200.00, without first obtaining a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors. The
$200.00 purchase limit did not apply to emergency situations, equipment repairs, or
emergency materials necessary for winter maintenance of roads.
a. Foster was a Member of the Board of Supervisors when Resolution 96R-2
was enacted.
1. Foster, as a Supervisor, executed his signature to enact Resolution
96R-2.
b. Specific purchasing language contained in Resolution 96R-2 included the
following: “All expenditures in excess of $200.00, except in cases of
emergency equipment repairs and emergency materials for winter
maintenance of roads, to be on a majority vote of the full Board.”
7. All Township expenditures, except those exempted by Resolution 96R-2, are to be
approved by the Board of Supervisors utilizing the following procedure:
a. The Township Secretary is to prepare a monthly bill list identifying all
expenditures for the Supervisors to review and approve.
b. The bill lists are then provided to the Supervisors the day of the meeting for
approval.
c. Supervisors approve the bill lists for payment by signing/endorsing the bill
lists.
d. The bill lists are not presented before the Board for an actual vote of
approval.
e. From 2008 through March 2012, monthly bills to be paid were listed as part
of the minutes with no vote of approval recorded.
1. Approval for payment was evidenced by the Supervisors endorsing a
copy of the monthly bill list.
f. From April 2012 to the present, the Supervisors have continued to endorse
the monthly bill lists.
1. These bill listings are not included as part of the official minutes.
2. Minutes include reference to the bills being approved and/or who
made/seconded motions to pay same.
3. Minutes do not reflect an official vote for approval.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT FOSTER MADE
PURCHASES FROM FEDERAL SURPLUS ON BEHALF OF THE TOWNSHIP WITH
SOME ITEMS BEING DESTROYED, LOST OR OTHERWISE CONVERTED TO
PERSONAL USE.
8. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of General Services, operates the
Federal Surplus Property Program.
Foster, 13-015
Page 4
a. This program offers surplus federal property to eligible governmental and
non-profit entities at deeply discounted prices as compared to the items’ fair
market value.
b. This program is not available to the general public.
9. The Township has participated in the Federal Surplus Property Program, through
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Department of General Services, since at
least February 1, 2003.
a. The Township was assigned Donee ID # 544050, RR # 2, Box 255A, Wysox,
PA 18854-9651.
b. The Township was assigned Donee Federal ID # 246001601 under the
Category: Public, 08 Bradford County.
10. Since July 25, 2008, Foster was the only Township representative to make
purchases from the Commonwealth’s Federal Surplus Property Program utilizing
the Township’s account.
a. The purchases made by Foster were not authorized by the Board of
Supervisors.
b. Some of the purchases made by Foster served no purpose for the Township.
11. Township records reflect that Foster made trips to the Federal Surplus Property
Program in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, at least once a year since July 25, 2008.
a. Since July 25, 2008, Foster made approximately eight (8) trips to the Federal
Surplus Property Program.
b. Two of the days Foster made purchases from the Federal Surplus Property
Program (August 19, 2010, and July 27, 2011), Foster was not serving in his
Roadmaster capacity/receiving Roadmaster wages.
c. At other times, Foster was compensated at his hourly Roadmaster wage
when he visited the Federal Surplus Property Program in Harrisburg
(February 17, 2009, August 21, 2009, January 25, 2012, June 19, 2012, and
August 29, 2012).
1. Foster’s Township time card for July 25, 2008, was not available for
review and as such a determination as to whether Foster received
Roadmaster pay for that particular day could not be made.
12. Between July 25, 2008, and August 29, 2012, no less than seventy-four (74)
separate items were purchased from the Commonwealth’s Federal Surplus Property
Program by Foster through the Township account.
a. The total federal government costs for the above-referenced items were
$32,827.23.
b. Costs to the Township for the above-referenced items totaled $916.43.
13. Between July 2008 and September 2012, Township financial records reflect that
eight (8) payments, for a total of $916.43, were made to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania as payment for goods purchased through the Commonwealth’s
Federal Surplus Property Program.
Foster, 13-015
Page 5
14. Township financial records evidence that Foster endorsed all eight (8) bill lists
authorizing payment to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for goods purchased
through the Commonwealth’s Federal Surplus Property Program.
15. Payments by the Township to the Commonwealth’s Federal Surplus Property
Program for purchases made by Foster were processed in the same manner as
those for any other Township purchases.
a. Foster did not seek preapproval from the Board of Supervisors before
making purchases from the Federal Surplus Property Program in excess of
$200.00.
b. Foster, as Roadmaster, was required to get approval from the Board of
Supervisors for any purchases in excess of $200.00 pursuant to the terms of
Resolution 96R-2.
16. Prior to January 23, 2014, the Township did not maintain any inventory of tools
and/or equipment utilized by Road Department employees.
a. On January 23, 2014, an inventory of tools and/or equipment maintained at
the Township garage was conducted by Township employees.
b. This inventory was conducted approximately three (3) months following
Foster’s retirement as the Township’s Roadmaster.
c. Foster did not participate in the tool and equipment inventory.
d. The basis for the inventory was to account for items that Foster purchased
from the Federal Surplus Property Program which could not be located.
17. Concerns were raised during the Township’s September 4, 2012, Board of
Supervisors meeting that Foster used the Township’s account to make purchases
from the Federal Surplus Property Program and converted some/all of the items to
personal use.
a. Foster’s 2012 purchases of a mirror and sink from the Federal Surplus
Property Program were the basis of the concerns.
b. Foster returned the items to the Township after being confronted by other
Members of the Board.
c. Foster denied ever converting Township-acquired federal surplus property to
his own personal use.
18. Minutes from the Board of Supervisors September 4, 2012, meeting reflect that
Foster was questioned about recent purchases he made from the Federal Surplus
Property Program. Excerpts from that meeting include the following discussion
about Foster’s surplus purchases:
a. Chair Kulick inquired about a bill marked Commonwealth of PA
for $14.95. Supervisor/Roadmaster Foster explained that as
he was down in Harrisburg, renewing his personal truck’s
registration, he stopped by and purchased two items at this
government surplus facility. He went on to explain that had he
not bought anything, a $10.00 charge would have been
incurred. Chair Kulick directly asked Gary Foster, Supervisor
Foster, 13-015
Page 6
& Roadmaster, if he, Gary, was on the Township clock at the
time. Gary Foster responded that he was on his own time, not
the Township’s.
19. Township time records contradict Foster’s public statement that he was “on his own
time.”
a. Time cards used by Foster to record his daily start and stop times confirm
that he was compensated by the Township for his June 19, 2012, and
August 29, 2012, visits to the Federal Surplus Property Program.
b. These time records confirm that Foster received compensation from the
Township for 7.19 hours on August 29, 2012, at a rate of $14.80 per hour
($106.41) while conducting personal business/renewing his personal truck
registration.
c. Foster utilized his purchase at the Federal Surplus Warehouse, 2221
Forster Street, Harrisburg, PA 17105, to justify his travel to Harrisburg to
renew his personal vehicle registration while being compensated as a
Township employee.
20. Township financial records confirm that Foster did not reimburse the Township for
the cost of any goods purchased from the Federal Surplus Property Program.
a. Foster, in his official capacity as the Township Roadmaster, did not maintain
any records detailing tool and equipment inventories, acquisition dates, or
disposal methods.
21. Foster returned the sink purchased on June 19, 2012, and the mirror purchased on
August 29, 2012, as a result of questions being raised about his acquisition of these
items. The following chart details various items, along with their federal acquisition
cost, that Foster purchased from the Federal Surplus Property Program that cannot
be accounted for within the Township inventory:
Item Code Description # Fed. Cost Twp. Cost Fed. Cost Total
8415-12-0263-014 Knee Pad 1 $ 17.42 $ 5.00 $ 17.42
9999-12-0073-004 Siren Speaker 1 $ 200.00 $35.00 $ 200.00
5315-09-0454-003 Finishing Nails 3 $ 150.00 $ 3.00 $ 150.00
7010-08-0002-012 Garmin GPS Unit 1 $ 155.00 $ 2.50 $ 155.00
5120-10-0344-028 Adjustment Radio/TV 2 $ 15.96 $10.00 $ 15.96
8465-08-0429-011 Rifleman Set 3 $1,171.35 $37.50 $1,171.35
8140-07-0634-006 Chest Ammunition 2 $ 11.98 $ 2.50 $ 11.98
8465-06-0679-009 Intrenching Tool 2 $ 102.00 $ 0.74 $ 102.00
31-07-0099-001 Welding/Torch Outfit 2 $1,600.00 $15.00 (1) $ 800.00
(1of 2 Missing) ($7.50)
8465-08-0015-024 Snowshoes 3 $ 169.65 $12.00 (2) $ 113.10
(2 of 3 Missing) ($8.00)
$111.74 $2,623.71
22. Foster did not seek or receive any approval from the Board of Supervisors to
dispose of, or otherwise convert to personal use, any of the missing federal surplus
property items.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT FOSTER AWARDED
A NO-BID CONTRACT AND FACILITATED PAYMENTS TO BE ISSUED TO FOSTER
Foster, 13-015
Page 7
COMMUNICATIONS, A BUSINESS WITH WHICH A MEMBER OF HIS IMMEDIATE
FAMILY IS ASSOCIATED.
23. Foster Communications, 829 Shores Hill Road, Towanda, PA 18848, is a
communications equipment sales and repair business owned and operated by
Gregory Foster.
a. Gregory Foster is Foster’s brother.
24. Foster Communications is not registered with the Pennsylvania Department of State
as an incorporated business or as a fictitious name.
a. Foster Communications does not have a storefront location.
b. Foster Communications is operated from a building situated on Gregory
Foster’s family farm.
c. Foster Communications is operated by Gregory Foster on a part-time basis
in addition to his family farming operation.
d. Foster Communications is located within the geographical boundaries of the
Township.
25. Gregory Foster is the sole employee of Foster Communications in addition to being
the owner.
a. Foster has never been an employee of nor does he receive any
compensation from Foster Communications.
b. Gregory Foster asserts that Foster Communications operates on a profit
margin of approximately ten percent (10%).
26. Foster Communications has sold radio/communication equipment to the Township
since approximately February 6, 2001.
a. Foster Communications has never executed a written contract with the
Township.
27. Foster, in his official capacity as a Supervisor and Roadmaster, was the Township
official who primarily made purchases from his brother’s business, Foster
Communications.
a. Foster was the only Township official involved in ordering goods and
services from Foster Communications prior to August 13, 2013.
b. Foster would contact his brother to order communications equipment and/or
services.
c. None of the goods or services Foster Communications sold to the Township
were the result of any bidding process.
28. Available Township financial records reflect that purchases have been made from
Foster Communications since at least February 6, 2001.
a. Since that time, the Township has issued approximately sixteen (16) checks
totaling $5,434.50 to Foster Communications.
Foster, 13-015
Page 8
29. Of the sixteen (16) payments listed in the previous finding, six (6) payments totaling
$2,127.50 were made to Foster Communications since February 14, 2009.
a. The nature of these payments related to repair and/or maintenance of
Township radio equipment.
b. One of the payments was in excess of $500.00 individually, check number
7887, dated October 15, 2013, in the amount of $945.00.
c. The three (3) payments issued to Foster Communications during 2011
totaled $877.50.
30. Between February 14, 2009, and October 15, 2013, Foster endorsed six (6)
separate monthly bill lists which included payments totaling $2,127.50 to be issued
to Foster Communications.
a. Foster was responsible for negotiating all orders with Foster
Communications with the exception of the October 15, 2013, invoice.
b. Payment for the October 15, 2013, invoice was the result of a quote being
submitted by Foster Communications to the Board of Supervisors.
31. Since February 14, 2009, Foster authorized payment in his official capacity as a
Member of the Board of Supervisors for six (6) Township bill lists which contained
payments made to Foster Communications.
32. Foster Communications business records include a quote dated August 14, 2013,
issued to the Township for (1) Kenwood TK7360H 50 Watt display readout, scan
with antenna installed in new John Deere Tractor, $450.00 and (1) Kenwood
TK7360H 50 Watt Base Station Installed, $520.00. Total $945.00.
a. This proposal was considered during the Board of Supervisors August 13,
2013, meeting.
b. Foster was present at this meeting and abstained from the vote taken to
utilize Foster Communications to update Township radios.
33. Minutes from the Board of Supervisors August 13, 2013, meeting include the
following recorded discussion and official action authorizing Foster
Communications to update Township radios:
a. Ken Whipp brought up the need to have the Township radios updated. This
was to encompass all radios. J. Kulick moved to hire Foster Communications
and Ken Whipp seconded. Gary Foster abstained from voting due to family
relationship. The motion passed.
b. The discussion of August 13, 2013, is the only recorded/memorialized action
of the Board of Supervisors regarding purchases from Foster
Communications since 2008 . . . .
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT FOSTER UTILIZED
THE AUTHORITY OF HIS PUBLIC POSITION TO AWARD AND APPROVE PAYMENT
FOR NO-BID CONTRACTS TO TOWNSHIP VENDORS/CONTRACTORS WITH WHICH
HE HAD AN ONGOING BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP AND THAT HE SIMULTANEOUSLY
CLAIMED TOWNSHIP SALARY/WAGE WHILE SERVING AS A SUBCONTRACTOR ON
TOWNSHIP PROJECTS.
Foster, 13-015
Page 9
34. Between 2008 and October 28, 2013, Foster, in his official capacity as the
Township Roadmaster, was responsible for hiring private contractors to be utilized
on Township public works projects.
a. In his capacity as Supervisor/Roadmaster, Foster would determine projects
to be completed.
1. Foster would identify the scope of work to be completed.
2. Foster would then identify potential contractors with the capabilities to
complete the project.
b. Foster then solely made the determination of which contractor to utilize.
35. Between 2008 and 2013, private contractors hired by Foster for Township projects
included M.R. Dirt, Inc., Middendorf Contracting, Inc., and Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc.
a. Foster d/b/a Gary Foster Construction had private business dealings with
each of these companies during the same time frames when he was
awarding Township contracts to these companies.
b. At the various times of their utilization, Foster never publicly disclosed that
he individually and/or d/b/a Gary Foster Construction had private business
dealings with each company.
36. M.R. Dirt, Inc. and Middendorf Contracting, Inc. share a common business address
of 21186 Route 187, Towanda, PA 18848.
a. Middendorf Contracting, Inc. performs general contracting and home building
services.
b. M.R. Dirt, Inc. provides hauling, excavation, maintenance, and equipment
rental services.
c. Middendorf Contracting, Inc. is owned by Scott Middendorf.
d. M.R. Dirt, Inc. is owned by Scott Middendorf and Chris Roof.
1. The M and R letters in M.R. Dirt represent owners Scott Middendorf
and Chris Roof.
37. Foster does not have a financial interest as that term is defined within the Ethics Act
(65 Pa.C.S. § 1102) in either Middendorf Contracting, Inc., or M.R. Dirt, Inc.
a. Foster d/b/a Gary Foster Construction has had an ongoing business
relationship with Middendorf and Roof since approximately 1993.
b. Foster d/b/a Gary Foster Construction was used primarily by M.R. Dirt, Inc.
as a hired/independent hauler.
c. Foster was one of approximately thirty (30) independent haulers M.R. Dirt,
Inc. would use based on the needs of M.R. Dirt, Inc. and the availability of
any given independent hauler(s).
Foster, 13-015
Page 10
d. M.R. Dirt, Inc. would annually issue Foster a 1099 Miscellaneous Income
form reporting income Foster received as a hired/independent hauler during
the years Foster had subcontracted with it.
1. These 1099 Miscellaneous Income forms were issued in the name of
Gary Foster, not Gary Foster Construction.
38. Business records of Gary Foster Construction indicate that Foster was most
recently compensated as a hired/independent hauler by M.R. Dirt, Inc. in 2008 and
2009.
a. 1099 Miscellaneous Income forms issued by M.R. Dirt, Inc. to Foster report
annual earnings of $5,022.03 and $13,805.00 during 2008 and 2009,
respectively.
b. Neither Foster individually nor Gary Foster Construction has performed any
compensated work for Middendorf Contracting, Inc. or M.R. Dirt, Inc. since
2009.
39. During 2009, Foster initiated a business relationship as an independent/hired
hauler for Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. which was similar to what he had with
Middendorf Contracting, Inc./M.R. Dirt, Inc.
a. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc., P.O. Box 970, Mooreland, OK 73852, was
providing hauling services to companies engaged in oil and natural gas
exploration/industry based in the greater Bradford County, Pennsylvania
region.
b. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. hired local independent haulers to supplement
its own fleet of trucks servicing the oil and natural gas companies.
c. Joseph Black was Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.’s General Manager in
Pennsylvania.
d. Black was responsible for securing independent/hired haulers needed to
supplement Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.’s fleet of trucks.
40. Gary Foster Construction was one of approximately twenty (20) independent/hired
haulers Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. utilized in the Bradford County region between
2009 and 2012.
a. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. owned approximately five (5) trucks it used for
hauling services during this time frame (2009-2012).
b. Local independent/hired haulers were used on an as-needed basis.
c. By 2012, Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.’s business/hauling activities in the
Bradford County area were limited to two (2) company trucks which provided
trash hauling services.
41. Business records of Gary Foster Construction confirm an ongoing business
relationship with Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. from 2009 through 2012.
a. The business relationship was initiated as a result of Foster’s name being
provided to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. by Chris Roof, co-owner of M.R. Dirt,
Inc.
Foster, 13-015
Page 11
b. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. would annually issue Foster a 1099
Miscellaneous Income form reporting income Foster received as an
independent/hired hauler during the years Foster was engaged by it.
1. The 1099 Miscellaneous Income forms were issued in the name of
Gary Foster Construction, not Gary Foster individually.
2. Foster reported this income on federal income tax returns as being
part of his Gary Foster Construction business operation.
42. Business records of Gary Foster Construction include1099 Miscellaneous Income
forms documenting income from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. from 2009 through
2012 in excess of $1,300.00 annually.
43. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. payments and M.R. Dirt, Inc. payments accounted for
62.74% of the reported gross income for Gary Foster Construction on Foster’s 2009
federal income tax return.
a. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. accounted for 100% of the reported gross
income for Gary Foster Construction on Foster’s 2010 federal income tax
return.
b. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. accounted for 99.33% of the reported gross
income for Gary Foster Construction on Foster’s 2011 federal income tax
return.
c. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. accounted for 60.37% of the reported gross
income for Gary Foster Construction on Foster’s 2012 federal income tax
return.
44. During the same time Gary Foster and/or Gary Foster Construction was engaged in
private business dealings with Middendorf Contracting, Inc./M.R. Dirt, Inc. and Jeff
McIntosh Trucking, Inc., Foster also was awarding these businesses no-bid
Township public works projects.
45. Between January 1, 2009, and October 4, 2012, Foster as a
Supervisor/Roadmaster selected M.R. Dirt, Inc. for Township projects.
a. Foster then approved seven (7) payments for Township public works
projects totaling $56,228.45 to M.R. Dirt, Inc.
46. Services provided by M.R. Dirt, Inc. included providing materials, general hauling,
and road repairs/maintenance.
a. As Roadmaster, Foster was responsible for contracting for and supervising
these projects.
b. Foster did not serve as a subcontractor for M.R. Dirt, Inc. on any of the
Township projects.
47. Since January 1, 2009, Foster participated by approving all Township purchases
from M. R. Dirt, Inc.
48. Foster approved two (2) of the Township payments totaling $5,400.00 issued to
M.R. Dirt, Inc. during 2009, while simultaneously receiving compensation as an
independent/hired hauler for M.R. Dirt, Inc.
Foster, 13-015
Page 12
a. None of the payments made by M.R. Dirt, Inc. to Foster pertained to
Township projects during 2009.
49. Foster did not publicly disclose his private business relationship with M.R. Dirt, Inc.
at a time when he was simultaneously awarding contracts to and approving
payments for Township projects completed by M.R. Dirt, Inc.
50. Foster as a Supervisor/Roadmaster made the determination to utilize
Middendorf Contracting, Inc. on Township projects in 2010 and 2012.
a. Foster’s decision to utilize Middendorf Contracting, Inc. occurred after
Foster’s private business relationship with M.R. Dirt, Inc. had ended.
51. Foster, in his official capacity as a Supervisor, participated in official action taken by
the Board of Supervisors by approving at least one (1) of the two (2) Township
payments totaling $5,480.00 which were issued to Middendorf Contracting, Inc.
between March 1, 2010, and December 14, 2012.
a. Foster, in his official capacity as the Roadmaster, was responsible for
placing orders with M.R. Dirt, Inc. and Middendorf Contracting, Inc.
52. Since March 1, 2010, Foster participated by approving at least one (1) invoice/bill
list authorizing payment to Middendorf Contracting, Inc. from the Township.
a. Foster was not used as a subcontractor by Middendorf Contracting, Inc. on
either of the aforementioned Township projects.
53. Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. performed road repairs for the Township at Foster’s
direction during 2012.
a. The nature of this work related to hauling, excavation, and pipe installation.
b. This work was done under the overall supervision of Foster as Roadmaster
and a Supervisor.
54. Foster did not publicly disclose that he had an ongoing business relationship with
Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. dating back to 2009 at the time in 2012 when he made
the decision to contract with it to perform Township road projects.
a. From 2009 through 2012, Foster d/b/a Gary Foster Construction received
payments well in excess of $1,300.00 from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.
55. On May 29, 2012, Foster and subordinate Township employee Robert Brown were
assisting an operator from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. in the installation of culvert
pipes on Allen Road within the Township.
a. Foster contracted with Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. to perform the repair work
in his official capacity as a Supervisor and Roadmaster.
b. Foster additionally performed labor on the project as a paid Township
employee.
1. Foster was compensated at a rate of $14.80 per hour as Roadmaster
during 2012.
56. During the Allen Road project, a tri-axle dump truck was needed to haul material.
Foster, 13-015
Page 13
a. According to Joseph Black, General Manager for Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc., McIntosh did not have any tri-axle dump trucks readily available on
such short notice and within reasonable distance from Allen Road on May
29, 2012.
b. Foster had his tri-axle dump truck available on May 29, 2012.
c. Foster elected to use his own tri-axle dump truck for two (2) hours on the
Allen Road project.
d. Foster did not “clock out” as an employee of the Township for the two (2)
hours he operated his personal tri-axle dump truck for the project.
1. Foster was compensated by the Township as Roadmaster and billed
Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. for the same two-hour period on May 29,
2012.
57. Invoices submitted by Gary Foster Construction to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.
included one dated July 6, 2012, which contained charges for work which Foster
performed associated with the Township on May 29, 2012.
a. The Gary Foster Construction invoice dated July 6, 2012, submitted to Jeff
McIntosh Trucking, Inc. was in the amount of $1,840.00.
b. The invoice included work performed on five (5) separate days between May
9, 2012, and May 29, 2012.
c. The May 29, 2012, entry included two (2) hours of hauling charges for the
Allen Road project at a rate of $80.00 per hour.
1. A notation for the services provided was “hauled 2A for Wysox
Township.”
d. Foster performed this work as a subcontractor for Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc. while simultaneously being compensated as the Roadmaster working on
the same project.
58. Gary Foster Construction’s July 6, 2012, invoice to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.
consisted of the following services provided (emphasis added):
Invoice Date Amount Work Date Hours Rate Location
07/06/12 $1,840.00 05/09/12 6.50 $80.00 Laurel Pad
05/10/12 6.00 $80.00 Drill Cuttings
05/11/12 6.00 $80.00 Drill Cuttings
05/24/12 305.00 $80.00 Alberta Pad
05/29/12 2.00 $80.00 Hauled 2a for Wysox Twp
59. Foster did not publicly disclose or advise the Board of Supervisors that he received
compensation from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. for hauling services on the Allen
Road project while simultaneously being compensated by the Township as its
Roadmaster for working on the project.
a. Foster made no disclosure as to the dual compensation while submitting his
monthly Roadmaster Report to the Board of Supervisors.
Foster, 13-015
Page 14
60. Meeting minutes from the Board of Supervisors meetings held on May 1, 2012, and
June 5, 2012, include Roadmaster Reports provided to the Board by Foster
regarding the Allen Road project. Minutes include the following reports:
a. May 1, 2012: (excerpt)
“The Roadmaster reported on the repairs needed on Allen
Lane \[Road\] as there was a pipe to be placed in the ground
and the job required an excavator to be rented.”
Present: Foster, Shoemaker
Absent: Kulick.
b. June 5, 2012: (excerpt)
“The Roadmaster reported that he needed to hire operators for
berming the roads. As well, he noted that the Allen Road pipe
replacement was complete.”
Present: Foster, Shoemaker, Kulick.
61. Township financial records confirm Foster participated in approving payments
issued to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. as follows:
Transaction Date Check # Amount Approved Signed Total Signatures
02/15/12 7296 $5,000.58 Missing Unknown Unknown
07/27/12 7437 $1,460.00 07/15/12 Yes 3
$6,460.58
a. The Township’s July 27, 2012, payment to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.
included payment for two (2) hours of hauling services provided by Gary
Foster Construction, as detailed in the following finding.
62. Township check number 7437, issued to Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc., was for Jeff
McIntosh Trucking, Inc.’s invoice number 9754, dated June 12, 2012, in the amount
of $1,460.00.
a. This invoice was for hauling, excavation, and culvert pipe installation work
associated with the Allen Road project.
b. Itemized charges were listed as follows:
Truck Hours: 2/hr @ $ 90/hr $ 180.00
Excavator: 8/hr @ $125/hr $1,000.00
Lowboy: 2/hr @ $140/hr $ 280.00
Total$1,460.00
c. The invoice did not disclose that a Gary Foster Construction truck was used
on the project, which accounts for $180.00 of the $1,460.00 in total charges
billed to the Township.
d. Foster approved the invoice which included the time billed to Jeff McIntosh
Trucking, Inc. by Foster.
Foster, 13-015
Page 15
63. Foster’s timecard for May 29, 2012, documents that he was clocked in from 4.17
(4:17 a.m.) until 13.11 (1:11 p.m.), and all the time was compensated by the
Township for a total of 8.94 hours.
a. Foster did not clock out for the two (2) hours he charged Jeff McIntosh
Trucking, Inc. ($160.00) for hauling services on the same project.
b. Foster simultaneously received compensation from Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc. and the Township for this two (2) hour window of time.
c. Foster admitted his receipt of the dual compensation to an Investigator of the
State Ethics Commission.
64. Foster was questioned as to his personal business relationship with Jeff McIntosh
Trucking, Inc. during the Board of Supervisors August 7, 2012, meeting. Excerpts
from that meeting include the following recorded discussion:
a. August 7, 2012:
William Them questioned a bill item which has been paid to
McIntosh Trucking. His query was directed at Supervisor
Foster in that he asked the Supervisor directly if he had
worked for McIntosh Trucking and what was the job about.
Foster replied that he does indeed work for McIntosh Trucking
(as a sub-contractor) but did not “make any money off that
job.” He further explained that the job was installing a pipe
under Allen Road. Mr. Them wondered if it was unethical that
his company was hired as Foster was the one solely
responsible for the hiring of the firm. Foster replied that there
was “no problem.”
Present: Shoemaker, Kulick, Foster.
b. Foster’s public representation that he did not “make any money off that job”
was factually incorrect.
1. Foster did not publicly disclose that he received the dual
compensation.
65. Based on concerns that Foster was being compensated for Roadmaster hours
which he did not actually work, without Foster’s knowledge, the Township directed
that a GPS tracking device be installed on the Township truck Foster regularly
used.
a. This GPS tracking device was installed and monitored by Teledair
Communications & Security, Inc., Sayre, Pennsylvania.
b. This tracking device was installed on the Township’s 1 Ton Ford pickup truck
operated primarily if not exclusively by Foster.
c. GPS monitoring of this vehicle occurred from July 14, 2013, through October
8, 2013.
66. Edward V. Darrow, President of Teledair Communications & Security, Inc., provided
the Township with a tracking report and findings dated October 23, 2013. Excerpts
from Darrow’s October 23, 2013, correspondence include certified information on
the GPS unit installed. This certification reads as follows:
Foster, 13-015
Page 16
a. This letter is to certify that the Uplink GPS Tracking device
was installed in the Wysox Township 550 1 Ton Ford Pickup
Truck on July 14, 2013 @ 4:40pm with the identification lMEi #
359138035805774. This Uplink GPS Tracking device has
been fully operational from the date of the install and remains
in perfect working order and continues to work as of the date
of this letter.
67. The GPS tracking summary found that between July 14, 2013, and October 8, 2013,
for a total of approximately 91.75 hours, Foster’s Township truck was either parked
at Foster’s residence or at locations not relating to Township business while Foster
was clocked in for the Township.
a. The summary valued this misuse at $1,357.90, based on Foster’s hourly rate
as Roadmaster of $14.80.
68. This report was the basis for Foster’s resignation as Roadmaster effective October
28, 2013, and a $1,357.90 reimbursement payment made by Foster to the
Township on October 30, 2013.
a. Gary Foster Construction check number 8468, dated October 30, 2013, was
issued to the Township in the amount of $1,357.90.
b. Nothing is noted in the memo portion of this check.
c. The payment was a reimbursement of the $1,357.90 in Township wages
Foster received for hours not worked, as detailed in the GPS tracking
summary.
69. Foster’s resignation as Roadmaster and $1,357.90 reimbursement payment were
accepted by the Board of Supervisors during a special meeting held on October 29,
2013.
a. Foster did not resign his position on the Board of Supervisors.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ALLEGATIONS THAT FOSTER FILED
DEFICIENT STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FORMS FOR CALENDAR
YEARS 2008 THROUGH 2012.
70. Foster, in his official capacity as a Supervisor, is annually required to file a
Statement of Financial Interests form by May 1, containing information for the prior
calendar year.
71. Foster is annually provided with a blank Statement of Financial Interests form to
complete.
a. Blank Statement of Financial Interests forms are distributed by the Township
Secretary for completion to Township officials generally each January.
b. Completed Statement of Financial Interests forms for Township officials are
maintained by the Township Secretary along with other official Township
records.
72. Statement of Financial Interests forms on file with the Township include the
following filings by Foster:
Foster, 13-015
Page 17
a. Calendar Year: 2012
Dated: 1/25/13 on form SEC-1REV. 01/13
Position: Supervisor
Creditors: None
Direct/Indirect Income: No Response
All Other Financial Interests: None.
b. Calendar Year: Blank (2011Calendar Year)
Dated: 1/18/12 on form SEC-1 REV. 01/12
Position: Supervisor
Creditors: None
Direct/Indirect Income: None
All Other Financial Interests: None.
c. Calendar Year: 2010
Dated: 1/19/11 on form SEC-1 REV. 01/11
Position: Supervisor
Creditors: None
Direct/Indirect Income: None
All Other Financial Interests: None.
d. Calendar Year: 2009
Dated: 1/27/10 on form SEC-1 REV. 01/10
Position: Supervisor
Creditors: None
Direct/Indirect Income: None
All Other Financial Interests: None.
e. Calendar Year: 2008
Dated: 1/24/09 on form SEC-1 REV. 01/09
Position: Supervisor
Creditors: None
Direct/Indirect Income: None
All Other Financial Interests: None.
73. Foster failed to report any direct/indirect sources of income in excess of $1,300.00
on any Statements of Financial Interests filed for calendar years 2008 through
2012.
a. Foster received wages in excess of $1,300.00 from the Township during
each of these calendar years.
b. Foster received income in excess of $1,300.00 from his business, Gary
Foster Construction, during each of these calendar years.
1. Income received from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. was included as
part of the annual gross revenues received by Gary Foster
Construction.
c. Foster received rental income in excess of $1,300.00 annually during the
2009, 2011, and 2012 calendar years.
d. Foster received income in excess of $1,300.00 from M.R. Dirt, Inc. during the
2008 and 2009 calendar years.
74. Foster failed to report his ownership interest \[sic\] in Gary Foster Construction in
Box 13: Office, Directorship, or Employment in any Business on Statement of
Financial Interests forms filed for calendar years 2008 through 2012.
Foster, 13-015
Page 18
a. Foster has an “X” marked in the box representing “None” on each of these
filings.
75. Foster failed to report his ownership interest in Gary Foster Construction in Box 14:
Financial Interest in any Legal Entity in Business for Profit on Statement of
Financial Interests forms filed for calendar years 2008 through 2012.
a. Foster has an “X” marked in the box representing “None” on each of these
filings.
76. Foster, in his official capacity as a Member of the Board of Supervisors, received
annual gross compensation in the amount of $1,875.00.
a. This compensation was included with Foster’s Roadmaster wages as
reported on annual W-2 Wage and Tax Statements issued to him by the
Township.
III.DISCUSSION:
As a Member of the Wysox Township (“Township”) Board of Supervisors since
approximately January 5, 1992, Respondent Gary Foster, also referred to herein as
“Respondent,” “Respondent Foster,” and “Foster,” 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 Foster violated Sections 1103(a), 1103(f), 1105(b)(5),
1105(b)(8), and 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act: (1) when he utilized the authority of his public
position for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, an immediate family member and/or a
business with which he and/or an immediate family member is associated by awarding no-
bid contracts to Township vendors/contractors and subsequently serving as a
subcontractor on those projects; (2) when he approved payment of invoices to the
Township from said vendors/contractors; (3) when he simultaneously claimed Township
salary/wage and conducted non-Roadmaster business, namely, furthering personal
business and serving as subcontractor on Township projects; (4) when he utilized
Township equipment for non-Township purposes; (5) when he awarded no-bid work and
payments to Foster Communications, a business with which a member of his immediate
family is associated; (6) when he made purchases for personal use from the Federal
Surplus Property Program, which program is limited to governmental entities; and (7)
when he failed to list all sources of income, any office, directorship, or employment in any
business, and his financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit on
Statement of Financial Interests (“SFI”) forms filed for calendar years 2008 through 2012.
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
Foster, 13-015
Page 19
"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 1103(f) of the Ethics Act imposes certain restrictions as to contracting:
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(f)Contract.—
No public official or public employee or
his spouse or child or any business in which the person or his
spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract
valued at $500 or more with the governmental body with which
the public official or public employee is associated or any
subcontract valued at $500 or more with any person who has
been awarded a contract with the governmental body with
which the public official or public employee is associated,
unless the contract has been awarded through an open and
public process, including prior public notice and subsequent
public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts
awarded. In such a case, the public official or public employee
shall not have any supervisory or overall responsibility for the
implementation or administration of the contract. Any contract
or subcontract made in violation of this subsection shall be
voidable by a court of competent jurisdiction if the suit is
commenced within 90 days of the making of the contract or
subcontract.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(f).
Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act provides in part that no public official/public
employee or his spouse or child or business with which the public official/public employee
or his spouse or child is associated may enter into a contract with his governmental body
valued at five hundred dollars or more or any subcontract valued at five hundred dollars or
more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body with
which the public official/public employee is associated unless the contract is awarded
through an open and public process including prior public notice and subsequent public
disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded.
Foster, 13-015
Page 20
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.
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.
Section 1105(b)(8) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any
office, directorship or employment in any business entity.
Section 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFl any
financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. 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.
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 Township is governed by a three-Member Board of Supervisors (“Board”).
Foster has served as a Township Supervisor since approximately January 5, 1992.
The Board appointed Foster as Township Roadmaster (“Roadmaster”) each
January from 2008 through 2013. Foster resigned from his position as Roadmaster
effective October 28, 2013. As Roadmaster, Foster was responsible for the general care
and maintenance of Township roads, equipment, and facilities, and he possessed the
authority to select, hire, and schedule private contractors for Township road projects.
All Township expenditures, with the exception of those exempted by Township
Resolution 96R-2 (“Resolution 96R-2”), are to be approved by the Board. Resolution 96R-
2 authorizes the Roadmaster to make purchases up to $200.00, without first obtaining a
majority vote of the Board. The $200.00 purchase limit does not apply to emergency
situations, equipment repairs, or emergency materials necessary for winter maintenance of
roads. For Township expenditures not exempted by Resolution 96R-2, the Board
approves monthly bill lists for payment by signing or endorsing the bill lists. Foster, as a
Supervisor and Roadmaster, had the ability to make purchases on behalf of the Township
consistent with the provisions of Resolution 96R-2.
Re: Purchases from the Federal Surplus Property Program
The Pennsylvania Department of General Services operates the Federal Surplus
Property Program (“Surplus Property Program”). The Surplus Property Program, which is
not available to the general public, offers surplus federal property to eligible governmental
and non-profit entities at deeply discounted prices as compared to the property’s fair
market value. The Township has participated in the Surplus Property Program since at
least February 1, 2003.
Beginning July 25, 2008, Foster was the only Township representative to make
purchases from the Surplus Property Program utilizing the Township’s account. Between
July 25, 2008, and August 29, 2012, Foster made approximately eight trips to the Surplus
Property Program in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. When Foster made purchases from the
Surplus Property Program in Harrisburg on August 19, 2010, and July 27, 2011, he was
not serving in his Roadmaster capacity or receiving Roadmaster wages. At other times,
Foster was compensated at his hourly Roadmaster wage when he visited the Surplus
Property Program in Harrisburg.
Foster, 13-015
Page 21
Between July 25, 2008, and August 29, 2012, Foster purchased no less than
seventy-four separate items from the Surplus Property Program through the Township
account at a total cost to the Township of $916.43. Foster’s purchases were not
authorized by the Board, and some of them served no purpose for the Township. Foster,
as a Supervisor, endorsed eight bill lists authorizing payments by the Township totaling
$916.43 for the goods purchased through the Surplus Property Program.
At the Board meeting on September 4, 2012, Foster was questioned about recent
purchases that he had made from the Surplus Property Program, based upon his
purchases of a mirror and a sink. Minutes from the meeting reflect that when questioned
by the Chair of the Board about a bill from the Commonwealth in the amount of $14.95,
Foster explained that since he was in Harrisburg to renew his personal truck’s registration
on August 29, 2012, he stopped by the Surplus Property Program and purchased two
items. Although Foster told the Chair of the Board that he was on his own time when he
went to the Surplus Property Program on August 29, 2012, Foster received Roadmaster
wages totaling $106.41 from the Township for his trip to the Surplus Property Program on
that date. The parties have stipulated that Foster utilized his purchase at the Surplus
Property Program to justify his travel to Harrisburg to renew his personal truck registration
while being compensated as a Township employee. Foster returned the sink and mirror
after being confronted by the other Supervisors.
Foster, as Roadmaster, did not maintain any records detailing tool and equipment
inventories, acquisition dates, or disposal methods. On January 23, 2014, an inventory of
tools and equipment maintained at the Township garage was conducted by Township
employees in order to account for items that Foster had purchased from the Surplus
Property Program but which could not be located. As detailed in Fact Finding 21, the
Township inventory could not account for various items costing the Township a total of
$111.74 that Foster had purchased from the Surplus Property Program. The federal
acquisition cost of the unaccounted for items totaled $2,623.71. Foster did not reimburse
the Township for the cost of any goods purchased from the Surplus Property Program, and
he did not seek or receive any approval from the Board to dispose of or otherwise convert
to personal use any of the missing federal surplus property items.
Re: Foster Communications
Foster’s brother, Gregory Foster, owns and operates Foster Communications, a
communications equipment sales and repair business located within the Township. Foster
Communications has sold radio/communications equipment to the Township since
approximately February 6, 2001.
Foster was the only Township official involved in ordering goods and services from
Foster Communications prior to August 13, 2013. Foster would contact his brother to
order communications equipment or services, and no bidding process was used.
At a Board meeting on August 13, 2013, Foster abstained from a vote taken on a
proposal to utilize Foster Communications to update Township radios.
Between February 14, 2009, and October 15, 2013, Foster, as a Supervisor,
endorsed six monthly Township bill lists which included payments totaling $2,127.50 to be
issued to Foster Communications for repair or maintenance of Township radio equipment.
Foster was responsible for negotiating all but one of the orders placed with Foster
Communications during that time frame.
Re: Foster’s Actions Pertaining to Township Contractors
For approximately the past thirty years, Foster has owned and operated Gary Foster
Construction (“Foster Construction”), which provides tri-axle hauling and excavation
Foster, 13-015
Page 22
services. The assets of Foster Construction are held either individually by Foster or jointly
with his wife.
Foster, doing business as Foster Construction, had private business dealings with
various companies, including M.R. Dirt, Inc. (“M.R. Dirt”) and Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc.
(“McIntosh Trucking”). M.R. Dirt provides hauling, excavation, maintenance, and
equipment rental services. Foster was utilized as a hired/independent hauler by M.R. Dirt
and received income from M.R. Dirt in the amounts of $5,022.03 during 2008 and
$13,805.00 in 2009. Foster has not performed any compensated work for M.R. Dirt since
2009. During 2009, Foster initiated a business relationship as a hired/independent hauler
for McIntosh Trucking, which was providing hauling services to companies engaged in oil
and natural gas exploration/industry based in the greater Bradford County, Pennsylvania
region. Foster had an ongoing business relationship with McIntosh Trucking from 2009
through 2012, and during those years, Foster Construction annually received income in
excess of $1,300.00 from McIntosh Trucking.
Between 2008 and October 28, 2013, Foster was solely responsible for hiring
private contractors to be utilized on Township public works projects. During this time
period, Foster awarded no-bid Township public works projects to private contractors,
including M.R. Dirt and McIntosh Trucking.
Between January 1, 2009, and October 4, 2012, Foster, as a Supervisor and
Roadmaster, selected M.R. Dirt for Township projects. M.R. Dirt provided materials and
services, including general hauling and road repairs/maintenance. Foster approved
seven payments totaling $56,228.45 to M.R. Dirt for Township public works projects,
including two of the Township payments totaling $5,400.00 issued to M.R. Dirt during
2009. Foster did not publicly disclose that he had a private business relationship with M.R.
Dirt at the time when he was simultaneously awarding contracts and approving payments
to M.R. Dirt for Township projects.
During 2012, Foster, in his capacity as a Supervisor and Roadmaster, contracted
with McIntosh Trucking to perform road repairs for the Township. The work was related to
hauling, excavation, and pipe installation and was done under the overall supervision of
Foster. Foster did not publicly disclose that he had an ongoing business relationship with
McIntosh Trucking dating back to 2009 at the time when he made the decision to contract
with it to perform Township road projects.
On May 29, 2012, Foster and a subordinate Township employee were assisting an
operator from McIntosh Trucking in the installation of culvert pipes on Allen Road within
the Township. A tri-axle dump truck was needed to haul material, but McIntosh Trucking
did not have any tri-axle dump trucks readily available on such short notice and within a
reasonable distance from Allen Road. Foster had his tri-axle dump truck available, and he
elected to use it for two hours on the Allen Road project. Foster did not “clock out” as an
employee of the Township for the two hours he operated his personal tri-axle dump truck
for the Allen Road project. Foster was compensated by the Township as Roadmaster and
billed McIntosh Trucking $160.00 for hauling services as a subcontractor for the same two-
hour period on May 29, 2012. On July 15, 2012, Foster, as a Supervisor, approved
payment of an invoice in the amount of $1,460.00 from McIntosh Trucking, which included
a charge of $180.00 for the two hours of hauling services that Foster provided for the Allen
Road project.
Re: Foster’s Resignation as Roadmaster
Based on concerns that Foster was being compensated for Roadmaster hours
which he did not actually work, the Township directed that a GPS tracking device be
installed without Foster’s knowledge on the Township truck that he regularly used.
Monitoring of a GPS device installed on Foster’s Township truck found that between July
Foster, 13-015
Page 23
14, 2013, and October 8, 2013, for a total of approximately 91.75 hours, the Township
truck was either parked at Foster’s residence or at locations not relating to Township
business while Foster was clocked in for the Township. At a special meeting of the Board
on October 29, 2013, the Board accepted Foster’s resignation as Roadmaster effective
October 28, 2013, as well as a payment from Foster in the amount of $1,357.90 as
reimbursement for Township wages that he received for hours not worked. Foster did not
resign from the Board and indicated that he would continue to serve on the Board for the
remainder of his elected term.
Re: Foster’s SFIs
As a Township Supervisor, Foster is required to annually file an SFI by May 1
containing information for the prior calendar year. Foster failed to disclose any sources of
income in excess of $1,300 on his SFIs for the 2008 through 2012 calendar years,
including: (1) both the Township and Foster Construction for the 2008 through 2012
calendar years; (2) rental income for the 2009, 2011, and 2012 calendar years; and (3)
M.R. Dirt for the 2008 and 2009 calendar years. The parties have stipulated that Foster
further failed to disclose his office, directorship or employment in Foster Construction and
his ownership interest in Foster Construction on his SFIs for the 2008 through 2012
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 Foster utilized his
purchase at the Federal Surplus Warehouse,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to justify his travel to
Harrisburg to renew his personal vehicle
registration while simultaneously being
compensated as a Township employee.
b. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a), occurred when Foster disposed of, or
otherwise converted to personal use, items
purchased as a Wysox Township official from
Federal Surplus Property.
c. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a), occurred when Foster awarded no-bid
work and subsequently approved payment to
Foster Communications, a business with which
an immediate family member is associated.
d. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a), occurred when Foster awarded no-bid
contracts to M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh
Foster, 13-015
Page 24
Trucking at a time when said entities were
serving as vendors/contractors for Wysox
Township, and Foster knew or had a reasonable
expectation that he or a business with which he
is associated would be serving as a
subcontractor to M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff
McIntosh Trucking. A violation of Section
1103(a) additionally occurred when Foster
approved payment of invoices to the Township
from M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh
Trucking while Foster or a business with which
he is associated was serving as a subcontractor
to those entities.
e. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a), occurred when Foster approved
payment of an invoice billed to the Township
from Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc., for \[two\] hours
of truck rental – attributable to Foster’s personal
truck, which was used by McIntosh Trucking and
operated by Foster, while Foster was
simultaneously being compensated as the
Township Roadmaster.
f. That a violation of Section 1105(b) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1105(b), occurred when Foster failed to list all
sources of income, any office, directorship, or
employment in any business, and his financial
interest in any \[legal entity in business for profit\]
on Statement of Financial Interests forms filed
for calendar years 2008 through 2012.
4. Foster agrees to make payment in the amount of $2,000.00 in
settlement of this matter as follows:
a. $1,250.00 made payable to the Commonwealth
of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final
adjudication in this matter.
b. $750.00 which represents a portion of the
expenses and costs incurred by the State Ethics
Commission in the investigation and
administrative prosecution of the instant matter,
payable by certified check or money order made
payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
Commission within thirty (30) days of the
issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
5. To the extent he has not already done so, Foster agrees to file
complete and accurate amended Statements of Financial
Interests with Wysox Township through the Pennsylvania
State Ethics Commission, for the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and
Foster, 13-015
Page 25
2012 calendar years within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
the final adjudication in this matter.
6. Foster agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation
or other payment from Wysox 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 2-3.
The first and second recommended violations of Section 1103(a) relate to Foster’s
trips to and purchases from the Surplus Property Program in Harrisburg.
Beginning July 25, 2008, Foster was the only Township representative to make
purchases from the Surplus Property Program utilizing the Township’s account. Between
July 25, 2008, and August 29, 2012, Foster made approximately eight trips to the Surplus
Property Program in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. For some but not all of those trips, Foster
was compensated at his hourly Roadmaster wage when he visited the Surplus Property
Program. Between July 25, 2008, and August 29, 2012, Foster purchased no less than
seventy-four separate items from the Surplus Property Program through the Township
account. When Foster visited the Surplus Property Program and purchased surplus
property on August 29, 2012, he received Roadmaster wages totaling $106.41 from the
Township for his trip. Foster utilized his purchase at the Surplus Property Program on
August 29, 2012, to justify his travel to Harrisburg to renew his personal truck registration
while being compensated as a Township employee.
A Township inventory conducted on January 23, 2014, could not account for various
items costing the Township a total of $111.74 (with a federal acquisition cost of $2,623.71)
that Foster had purchased from the Surplus Property Program. Foster did not reimburse
the Township for the cost of any goods purchased from the Surplus Property Program, and
he did not seek or receive any approval from the Board to dispose of or otherwise convert
to personal use any of the missing federal surplus property items.
We are mindful of the judicial decision in Bixler v. State Ethics Commission, 847
A.2d 785 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004) (holding that a net profit in the amount of $561.77 resulting
from business transactions between a township supervisor’s employer and the township
would fall within the “de minimis” exclusion to the definition of “conflict of interest”). If the
parties had not determined to enter into a Consent Agreement, we could have been
presented with issues as to whether, under the circumstances of this case, Bixler would
apply as to the wages received by Foster ($106.41) while traveling to Harrisburg to renew
his personal vehicle registration on August 29, 2012, or the value of the surplus property
purchased by Foster which could not be accounted for by the Township inventory.
However, given that: (1) the parties have entered into a comprehensive Consent
Agreement with the benefit of legal counsel to assist them in weighing all relevant factual
and legal considerations; and (2) the parties are in agreement that findings of violations of
Section 1103(a) as to the aforesaid wages and the unaccounted for surplus property would
Foster, 13-015
Page 26
be appropriate as part of an overall settlement of this case, we shall accept the parties’
proposed disposition.
Accordingly, we hold that Foster violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he utilized his purchase at the Surplus Property Program
warehouse, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to justify his travel to Harrisburg to renew his
personal vehicle registration while simultaneously being compensated as a Township
employee. We further hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§ 1103(a), occurred when Foster disposed of or otherwise converted to personal use items
purchased as a Township official from the Surplus Property Program.
We accept the recommendation of the parties for a finding that a violation of Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Foster awarded no-bid work and subsequently
approved payment to Foster Communications, a business with which an immediate family
member is associated.
Foster Communications is a communications equipment sales and repair business
owned by Foster’s brother, Gregory Foster. Between February 14, 2009, and October 15,
2013, Foster, as a Supervisor, endorsed six monthly Township bill lists which included
payments totaling $2,127.50 to be issued to Foster Communications for repair or
maintenance of Township radio equipment. Foster was responsible for negotiating all but
one of the orders placed with Foster Communications during that time frame, and no
bidding process was used.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings and the Consent Agreement, we hold that a
violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Foster
awarded no-bid work and subsequently approved payment to Foster Communications, a
business with which an immediate family member is associated.
We further accept the recommendation of the parties for findings that a violation of
Section 1103(a) of Ethics Act occurred when Foster awarded no-bid contracts to M.R. Dirt
and/or McIntosh Trucking at a time when said entities were serving as vendors/contractors
for the Township, and Foster knew or had a reasonable expectation that he or a business
with which he is associated would be serving as a subcontractor to M.R. Dirt and/or
McIntosh Trucking, and that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act additionally
occurred when Foster approved payment of invoices to the Township from M.R. Dirt and/or
McIntosh Trucking while Foster or a business with which he is associated was serving as a
subcontractor to those entities.
Foster owns and operates Foster Construction, which provides tri-axle hauling and
excavation services. Foster, doing business as Foster Construction, was utilized as a
hired/independent hauler by M.R. Dirt and received income from M.R. Dirt in the amounts
of $5,022.03 during 2008 and $13,805.00 in 2009. Foster has not performed any
compensated work for M.R. Dirt since 2009. During 2009, Foster initiated a business
relationship as a hired/independent hauler for McIntosh Trucking. Foster had an ongoing
business relationship with McIntosh Trucking from 2009 through 2012, and during those
years, Foster Construction annually received income in excess of $1,300.00 from McIntosh
Trucking.
Between 2008 and October 28, 2013, Foster was solely responsible for hiring
private contractors to be utilized on Township public works projects. During this time
period, Foster awarded no-bid Township public works projects to private contractors,
including M.R. Dirt and McIntosh Trucking.
Between January 1, 2009, and October 4, 2012, Foster, as a Supervisor and
Roadmaster, selected M.R. Dirt for Township projects. Foster, as a Supervisor, approved
seven payments totaling $56,228.45 to M.R. Dirt for Township public works projects,
Foster, 13-015
Page 27
including two of the Township payments totaling $5,400.00 issued to M.R. Dirt during
2009. During 2012, Foster, in his capacity as a Supervisor and Roadmaster, contracted
with McIntosh Trucking to perform road repairs for the Township. On July 15, 2012,
Foster, as a Supervisor, approved payment of an invoice in the amount of $1,460.00 from
McIntosh Trucking for work associated with a project on Allen Road in the Township.
Based upon the Stipulated Findings and the Consent Agreement, we hold that a
violation of Section 1103(a) of Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Foster
awarded no-bid contracts to M.R. Dirt and/or McIntosh Trucking at a time when said
entities were serving as vendors/contractors for the Township, and Foster knew or had a
reasonable expectation that he or a business with which he is associated would be serving
as a subcontractor to M.R. Dirt and/or McIntosh Trucking, and a violation of Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act additionally occurred when Foster approved payment of invoices
to the Township from M.R. Dirt and/or McIntosh Trucking while Foster or a business with
which he is associated was serving as a subcontractor to those entities.
The Consent Agreement of the parties proposes that this Commission find that a
violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Foster approved payment of
an invoice billed to the Township from McIntosh Trucking for two hours of truck rental
attributable to Foster’s personal truck, which was used by McIntosh Trucking and operated
by Foster while Foster was simultaneously being compensated as Roadmaster.
On May 29, 2012, Foster used his tri-axle dump truck for two hours on a project on
Allen Road within the Township as a subcontractor for McIntosh Trucking. Foster was
compensated by the Township as Roadmaster and billed McIntosh Trucking $160.00 for
hauling services for the same two-hour period on May 29, 2012. On July 15, 2012, Foster,
as a Supervisor, approved payment of an invoice in the amount of $1,460.00 from
McIntosh Trucking, which included a charge of $180.00 for the two hours of hauling
services that Foster provided for the Allen Road project.
If the parties had not determined to enter into a Consent Agreement, we could have
been presented with issues as to whether, under the circumstances of this case, Bixler,
supra, would apply as to Foster’s approval of the invoice from McIntosh Trucking that
included a charge of $180.00 for his hauling services on the Allen Road project. However,
given that: (1) the parties have entered into a comprehensive Consent Agreement with the
benefit of legal counsel to assist them in weighing all relevant factual and legal
considerations; and (2) the parties are in agreement that the finding of the aforesaid
violation of Section 1103(a) would be appropriate as part of an overall settlement of this
case, we shall accept the parties’ proposed disposition.
Accordingly, we hold that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§ 1103(a), occurred when Foster approved payment of an invoice billed to the Township
from McIntosh Trucking for two hours of truck rental attributable to Foster’s personal truck,
which was used by McIntosh Trucking and operated by Foster while Foster was
simultaneously being compensated as Roadmaster.
We further accept the recommendation of the parties and we hold that a violation of
Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), occurred when Foster failed to list
all sources of income, any office, directorship or employment in any business, and his
financial interest in any legal entity in business for profit on SFI forms filed for calendar
years 2008 through 2012.
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
1103(f) of the Ethics Act.
Foster, 13-015
Page 28
As part of the Consent Agreement, Foster has agreed to make payment in the
amount of $2,000.00 in settlement of this matter payable as follows: (a) $1,250.00 payable
to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30)
days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter; and (b) $750.00 in
reimbursement representing a portion of the expenses and costs incurred by this
Commission in the investigation and administrative prosecution of the instant matter,
payable by certified check or money order made payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Foster has agreed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other
payment from the 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, Foster has further agreed to file complete
and accurate amended SFIs for the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 calendar years with
the Township, 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, Foster is directed to make
payment in the amount of $2,000.00 payable as follows: (a) $1,250.00 payable to the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the
th
thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order; and (b) $750.00 in
reimbursement representing a portion of the expenses and costs incurred by this
Commission in the investigation and administrative prosecution of the instant matter,
payable by certified check or money order made payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
th
Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this
adjudication and Order.
Per the Consent Agreement, Foster is further directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the 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, Foster is directed to file complete and
accurate amended SFIs for the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 calendar years with the
th
Township, through this Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the
mailing date of this adjudication and Order.
Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further
action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order
enforcement action.
IV.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. As a Member of the Wysox Township (“Township”) Board of Supervisors since
approximately January 5, 1992, Respondent Gary Foster (“Foster”) 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. Foster violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he
utilized his purchase at the Federal Surplus Property Program warehouse,
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to justify his travel to Harrisburg to renew his personal
vehicle registration while simultaneously being compensated as a Township
employee.
Foster, 13-015
Page 29
3. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster disposed of or otherwise converted to personal use items purchased
as a Township official from the Federal Surplus Property Program.
4. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster awarded no-bid work and subsequently approved payment to Foster
Communications, a business with which an immediate family member is associated.
5. A violation of Section 1103(a) of Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when
Foster awarded no-bid contracts to M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc. at a time when said entities were serving as vendors/contractors for the
Township, and Foster knew or had a reasonable expectation that he or a business
with which he is associated would be serving as a subcontractor to M.R. Dirt, Inc.
and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc., and a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics
Act additionally occurred when Foster approved payment of invoices to the
Township from M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. while Foster or a
business with which he is associated was serving as a subcontractor to those
entities.
6. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster approved payment of an invoice billed to the Township from Jeff
McIntosh Trucking, Inc. for two hours of truck rental attributable to Foster’s personal
truck, which was used by Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. and operated by Foster while
Foster was simultaneously being compensated as the Township Roadmaster.
7. A violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), occurred
when Foster failed to list all sources of income, any office, directorship or
employment in any business, and his financial interest in any legal entity in
business for profit on Statement of Financial Interests forms filed for calendar years
2008 through 2012.
In Re: Gary Foster, : File Docket: 13-015
Respondent : Date Decided: 9/30/14
: Date Mailed: 10/21/14
ORDER NO. 1648
1. As a Member of the Wysox Township (“Township”) Board of Supervisors, Gary
Foster (“Foster”) violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he utilized his purchase at the
Federal Surplus Property Program warehouse, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, to justify
his travel to Harrisburg to renew his personal vehicle registration while
simultaneously being compensated as a Township employee.
2. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster disposed of or otherwise converted to personal use items purchased
as a Township official from the Federal Surplus Property Program.
3. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster awarded no-bid work and subsequently approved payment to Foster
Communications, a business with which an immediate family member is associated.
4. A violation of Section 1103(a) of Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when
Foster awarded no-bid contracts to M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking,
Inc. at a time when said entities were serving as vendors/contractors for the
Township, and Foster knew or had a reasonable expectation that he or a business
with which he is associated would be serving as a subcontractor to M.R. Dirt, Inc.
and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc., and a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics
Act additionally occurred when Foster approved payment of invoices to the
Township from M.R. Dirt, Inc. and/or Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. while Foster or a
business with which he is associated was serving as a subcontractor to those
entities.
5. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Foster approved payment of an invoice billed to the Township from Jeff
McIntosh Trucking, Inc. for two hours of truck rental attributable to Foster’s personal
truck, which was used by Jeff McIntosh Trucking, Inc. and operated by Foster while
Foster was simultaneously being compensated as the Township Roadmaster.
6. A violation of Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(b), occurred
when Foster failed to list all sources of income, any office, directorship or
employment in any business, and his financial interest in any legal entity in
business for profit on Statement of Financial Interests forms filed for calendar years
2008 through 2012.
7. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Foster is directed to make payment in
the amount of $2,000.00 payable as follows: (a) $1,250.00 payable to the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
th
Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this
Order; and (b) $750.00 in reimbursement representing a portion of the expenses
and costs incurred by the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission in the
investigation and administrative prosecution of the instant matter, payable by
Foster, 13-015
Page 31
certified check or money order made payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics
th
Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of this
Order.
8. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Foster is further directed to not accept
any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this
matter.
9. To the extent he has not already done so, Foster is directed to file complete and
accurate amended Statements of Financial Interests for the 2008, 2009, 2010,
2011, and 2012 calendar years with the Township, through the Pennsylvania State
th
Ethics Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30) day after the mailing date of
this Order.
10. Compliance with paragraphs 7, 8, and 9 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