HomeMy WebLinkAbout1681 Miller
In Re: Jamie Miller, : File Docket: 13-020
Respondent : X-ref: Order No. 1681
: Date Decided: 10/6/15
: Date Mailed: 10/19/15
Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair
Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair
Roger Nick
Kathryn Streeter Lewis
Maria Feeley
Melanie DePalma
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. Upon completion of its investigation, the
Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as
an “Investigative Complaint.” An Answer was filed and a hearing was requested. A
Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement 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.ALLEGATION:
That Jamie Miller, a public official/public employee in her capacity as Supervisor for
Washington Township, violated Section 1103(a) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998)
when she used the authority of her public office/employment for a private pecuniary benefit
including but not limited to utilizing office space, equipment and/or materials of the
Township Business Office to further her re-election campaign for Township Supervisor;
and when she claimed salary/wages as a Roadmaster while performing the duties of
Township Supervisor.
II.FINDINGS:
1. Jamie Miller served as a Supervisor for Washington Township, Fayette County,
from September 19, 2007, through December 31, 2013.
a. Miller served as an appointed Supervisor from September 19, 2007, through
December 31, 2007.
b. Miller served as an elected Supervisor from January 2008 through
December 31, 2013.
2. During Miller’s term as an elected Supervisor, Miller served in the following
appointed capacities:
Miller, 13-020
Page 2
a. Vice Chairman of the Board and Assistant Roadmaster in 2008 and 2009.
b. Assistant Secretary/Treasurer and Roadmaster in 2010, 2011, 2012, and
2013.
c. Miller was appointed to these positions during annual reorganization
meetings of the Board of Supervisors.
3. A three-Member Board of Supervisors governs Washington Township (hereafter,
“Township”).
a. The Supervisors hold one workshop meeting per month immediately prior to
the legislative meeting.
b. The Supervisors hold one legislative meeting per month at 7:00 p.m. on the
second Wednesday of each month.
c. Special meetings are held as necessary.
4. Supervisors are authorized to receive $100.00 (gross) per legislative meeting held.
a. Attendance is required at the legislative meetings/special meetings in order
to receive the compensation.
b. The Supervisors are not compensated for special meetings.
5. Voting at Board meetings occurs via an aye/nay voice vote after a motion is made
and seconded.
a. All objections and/or abstentions cast are noted in the minutes.
b. The Board votes to approve the minutes of the legislative/special meetings
for accuracy at the next meeting of the Board.
6. The Supervisors are provided with a meeting packet for review on the night of the
regularly scheduled legislative meetings.
a. Information contained within the meeting packet includes: agendas,
correspondence, the Roadmaster Report, etc.
7. The Board votes to approve bill lists which are presented for approval at each
legislative meeting.
a. The bill lists document all the bills received by the Township for payment
since the last legislative meeting.
8. Signature authority over the Township financial accounts rests with all three
Supervisors and the employed Secretary/Treasurer.
a. Township checks require the signature of any two of the aforementioned four
Township signatories.
b. A signature stamp is not utilized by the Township.
9. Miller, in her capacity as Supervisor, was responsible for performing the following
duties pursuant to the provisions of the Second Class Township Code:
Miller, 13-020
Page 3
a. General governance of the Township and the execution of legislative,
executive and administrative powers in order to ensure sound fiscal
management and to secure the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of
the Township;
b. Maintenance of Township-owned equipment and facilities;
c. Employing persons as may be necessary for the general conduct of the
business of the Township and providing for the compensation, organization
and supervisor of the persons so employed;
d. Authorizing attendance at conferences, institutes, schools and conventions:
e. Annually, on or before the first day of February, furnishing to the Board of
Auditors information on the construction or maintenance of roads or other
matters that may be required … to be included in the annual Township
report;
f. Providing for the annual tax duplicate to be prepared and presented to the
Tax Collector;
g. Performing duties and exercising powers as may be imposed or conferred by
law or the rules and regulations of any agency of the Commonwealth.
10. Amy Naulty has served as the employed Secretary/Treasurer for the Township
since November 2007.
a. One of Naulty’s responsibilities is to open the Township building to the
public and be present during the normal business hours of the Township.
1. Normal business hours of the Township building are 8:30 a.m. to 3:30
p.m., Monday through Friday.
b. Amy Naulty did not receive a lunch period during the time period of 2007
through 2013.
1. Amy Naulty had lunch at her desk while performing her duties.
11. Miller and Amy Naulty were the only two Township employee(s)/official(s) present at
the Township building on a consistent basis from 2008 through 2013.
a. Miller was present in her capacity as Roadmaster and Supervisor.
b. The Township representatives that frequented the Township building during
normal business hours were:
1. Police Superintendent Raymond Moody;
2. Zoning Officer Tim Naulty;
3. Supervisor Chuck Yusko; and
4. Supervisor Arnold Dull.
12. Miller, in her capacity as the Assistant/Secretary Treasurer, from 2010 through
2013, was to assist the employed Secretary/Treasurer on an as-needed basis.
Miller, 13-020
Page 4
a. The Assistant Secretary/Treasurer has the autonomy to assist the employed
Secretary/Treasurer without first being directed to do so by any Township
representative.
b. The Assistant Secretary/Treasurer position is not a compensated position.
13. Miller, in her capacity as Roadmaster, was responsible for performing the following
duties per the Second Class Township Code:
a. Reporting to the Board of Supervisors any information that may be required
by the Board of Supervisors and by the Department of Transportation;
b. Inspecting all roads and bridges as directed by the Board of Supervisors;
c. Doing, or directing to be done, all work necessary to carry out the
responsibilities imposed by the Board of Supervisors with respect to the
maintenance, repair, and construction of Township roads.
14. Miller, in her capacity as the Assistant Roadmaster, assisted the Roadmaster
and/or performed the duties of the Roadmaster in his/her absence.
a. No one Supervisor maintains more authority over the other Supervisor while
working as Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster for the Township.
15. The Board of Supervisors traditionally appointed a Roadmaster and an Assistant
Roadmaster at the re-organizational meeting held in January of each year.
a. Historically, Washington Township has appointed a Supervisor to fill the
positions of Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster.
16. The following Supervisors were appointed as the Roadmaster and Assistant
Roadmaster from 2008 through 2013:
Year Supervisor Appointed Supervisor Appointed
Roadmaster Assistant Roadmaster
2008 Chuck Yusko Jamie Miller
2009 Chuck Yusko Jamie Miller
2010 Jamie Miller, Chuck No Appointment
Yusko, Arnold Dull
2011 Jamie Miller Chuck Yusko
2012 Jamie Miller Chuck Yusko
2013 Jamie Miller Chuck Yusko
a. The appointment of all three Supervisors as Roadmaster in 2010 was a non-
traditional occurrence.
b. Miller did not have any Roadmaster experience prior to her initial
appointment as Assistant Roadmaster in 2008.
17. The Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster positions are not designated as either
a full-time or part-time position.
a. The Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster perform work on an as-needed
basis.
Miller, 13-020
Page 5
18. Miller, as the Roadmaster or the Assistant Roadmaster, was responsible for
overseeing the Township Road Crew.
a. The Road Crew has mainly consisted of two long-term, full-time employees,
since at least 2008.
1. Guy Bilsky has been employed as a Township Road Crew member
for approximately forty-seven (47) years.
2. Scott Hielman has been employed as a Township Road Crew
member for approximately thirty (30) years.
b. No one Road Crew member maintains more authority over the other Road
Crew member.
c. Seasonal/part-time employees were hired to assist the Road Crew from 2009
through 2012.
19. Absent emergencies, the Roadmaster duties are completed during the course of the
Township’s normal business hours.
a. Emergencies are normally caused by weather conditions such as excessive
snow, rain, etc.
1. The typical extent of a Roadmaster’s or Assistant Roadmaster’s
involvement during an emergency situation is to telephone the Road
Crew to respond to the emergency.
2. On occasion, the Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster may review
the emergency situation in-person.
20. The position of Roadmaster and/or Assistant Roadmaster do not require overtime
hours, unless an emergency arises.
a. Roadmaster duties are to be completed during normal business hours.
1. An exception would be emergency situations such as storms, snow
fall, etc.
2. Miller, as Roadmaster and/or Assistant Roadmaster, did not perform
any actual labor responsive to emergency situations.
21. Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster duties end following the completion of the
Township’s normal business hours unless an emergency situation arises.
22. The Road Crew employees are members of the United Steelworkers Local Union
3403-31 (hereafter, “Union”).
a. The Assistant Roadmaster and Roadmaster positions are not included in the
Union.
23. The Township entered into two agreements with the Union during the time period of
2008 through 2013.
a. The agreements prohibit the Township from “contracting out of work that can
be performed timely and within the abilities of the members of the Union.”
Miller, 13-020
Page 6
b. Although the agreements do not specify the prohibition of the Roadmaster or
Assistant Roadmaster from performing labor related duties, it is understood
that only the members of the Union perform duties related to road
maintenance.
c. The Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster do not operate any Township
vehicles/equipment in performance of road related work.
24. Prior to May/June 2012, the Road Crew maintained working hours from 7:00 a.m. to
3:30 p.m., Monday through Friday.
a. From approximately May/June 2012 through December 31, 2013, the Road
Crew worked from 6:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and
Friday.
1. Wednesday was typically an off-day.
b. Exceptions to the Road Crew’s schedule occurred due to inclement weather,
emergencies, holidays, etc.
25. Miller, as Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster, set her own work schedule.
a. Miller had no employment, other than working for the Township, during the
time period of 2008 through 2013.
b. Miller determined which days of the week she worked and the number of
hours she worked.
26. Miller’s oversight of the Road Crew as Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster was
limited.
a. Miller routinely began her work day between 7:30 a.m. and 8:30 a.m., after
the start time of the Road Crew.
1. The Road Crew typically began its work day without any
direction/input from Miller.
b. Miller rarely directed the Road Crew as to what work needed to be
performed.
1. Miller informed the Road Crew, “I don’t need to tell you what to do,
you know what to do.”
c. Miller had infrequent conversations with the Road Crew in-person or
telephonically.
1. The conversations related to work performed, work to be performed,
supplies/materials that needed ordered, condition of Township
equipment, etc.
2. Miller’s conversations with the Road Crew lasted only minutes in
duration.
d. Miller met with the Road Crew on a monthly basis to discuss with the Road
Crew work projects they completed for the month.
Miller, 13-020
Page 7
1. Miller called for the monthly Road Crew meetings so that she could
be informed of the work performed by the Road Crew for the month.
2. Miller’s monthly meetings with the Road Crew were typically her
longest interactions with the Road Crew.
e. Miller occasionally observed the Road Crew perform work at a job site.
1. Miller did not direct the Road Crew in regards to how to perform the
work she was observing.
27. From 2008 through 2013, the compensation of the Roadmaster and Assistant
Roadmaster was set by the elected Township Auditors during their re-
organizational meeting held in January of each year.
a. Miller’s position and rate of compensation, as set by the elected Auditors,
were as follows: 2008 – Assistant Roadmaster, $14/hr.; 2009 – Assistant
Roadmaster, $14/hr.; 2010 – Roadmaster, $14/hr., $560.00 per week
maximum; 2011 - Roadmaster, $14/hr., $560.00 per week maximum; 2012 -
$14.50/hr., $580.00 per week maximum; 2013 - $14.50/hr., $580.00 per
week maximum.
b. The Auditors did not require Miller to document the actual duties she
completed during the hours for which she claimed compensation as
Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster.
28. Miller documented the number of hours she claimed related to her Roadmaster or
Assistant Roadmaster position by utilizing the Township time clock or thumb
recognition device; verbalizing her hours worked to the employed
Secretary/Treasurer; and/or writing her hours worked on a piece of paper.
a. No documentation exists for time claimed by Miller for calendar year 2009,
except for the time period of January 1, 2009, through January 3, 2009.
b. Miller was not required to complete detailed time sheets to document
projects or how her working hours were spent.
29. Miller maintained sporadic, personal notes regarding her activities as the
Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster.
a. Miller’s notes rarely identified a date to correspond with the activities
identified.
b. The majority of the notes are names and telephone numbers.
1. Occasionally the notes documented a particular road related issue,
such as: “Eleanor Duwall, water into \[Rt.\] 201, 929-7519.”
c. Miller’s notes were not submitted in conjunction with her documented hours
worked.
30. Miller’s Roadmaster Reports did not document the duties/responsibilities that Miller
performed as Roadmaster.
a. The Roadmaster Reports documented labor related activities performed by
the Road Crew.
Miller, 13-020
Page 8
31. Miller routinely engaged in the non-Roadmaster activities during the days she was
compensated as Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster:
a. Miller spent the majority of her time in her Supervisor office.
1. Miller rarely left her office during a typical work day.
b. Miller routinely met with residents and Township representatives in her
Supervisor office.
1. Residents came to the Township building to visit with Miller socially
and/or to voice complaints.
aa. Some of the complaints related to road issues.
bb. The majority of the interactions Miller had with residents were
social and/or related to her Supervisor position.
2. Township officials Arnold Dull (Supervisor) and Raymond Moody (Police
Superintendent) routinely met with Miller to socialize and/or to discuss Township
related matters.
c. Miller did not complete any paperwork related to grants, funding, equipment
purchases, and equipment maintenance.
1. Amy Naulty completed said paperwork and provided it to Miller for her
signature.
2. The paperwork was provided to Miller because her signature as
Supervisor was required.
d. Miller spent some of her time in the Township office reading internet
newspaper articles, recipes, etc. on her Township computer.
e. Miller utilized the Township fax/copier/printer to print recipes from her
Township computer.
f. Miller talked on the Township telephone (cellular or landline) socially and/or
discussed Supervisor related issues.
g. Miller occasionally met with the Township Engineer and/or a PennDOT
representative.
32. During 2008 through 2013, Miller received compensation for a total of 6,971 hours
as Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster, for an average of 1,161 hours per year.
a. Miller’s compensation never exceeded the maximum $580.00 weekly
compensation set by the Auditors for Miller to receive as Roadmaster or
Assistant Roadmaster.
33. Miller’s documented time as Roadmaster and Assistant Roadmaster reflects that
Miller worked approximately 197 hours from 2008 through 2013, during hours the
Township building was closed to the public and/or the Road Crew was not
otherwise working.
a. The Road Crew finishes its workday by 3:30 p.m.
Miller, 13-020
Page 9
1. The above calculation was made beginning at 4:00 p.m.
34. Between 2010 and January 2012, Miller claimed 37.05 hours during times that the
Road Crew was working on snow removal.
a. Miller did not work with the Road Crew during this time.
b. Miller was compensated $518.70 ($14.00/hr. x 37.05 hrs.) for time claimed
during snow removal.
35. On three of those occasions--Saturday February 6, 2010, Sunday February 7, 2010,
and Saturday January 21, 2012--Miller claimed over ten (10) hours of Roadmaster
work while the Road Crew was performing snow removal.
a. Miller did not operate Township vehicles/equipment as Roadmaster or
participate in the snow removal.
b. Miller’s actions as Roadmaster were limited to having brief telephonic
conversations with the Road Crew regarding the conditions of the roads
during emergency situations related to snow.
36. Chuck Yusko, the current Township Roadmaster, submits records to the Township
which document his duties as Roadmaster requiring approximately twenty (20)
hours per month for completion.
a. Miller claimed hours on average which totaled approximately five times the
amount of hours (1,161 ÷ 240 = 4.8) as does Yusko to perform the
Roadmaster duties.
1. Miller averaged approximately twenty-four (24) hours per week (1,161
÷ 12 ÷ 4 = 24) for her service as Roadmaster or Assistant
Roadmaster.
37. On July 7, 2006, Senate Bill No. 809 was signed into law, amending the Second
Class Township Code to allow Supervisors to receive their employee wages if their
presence is required at any of the following:
a. A court of law concerning Township-related matters;
b. Any meeting of a Board, Council of Government, Commission, Authority, or
County Government sponsored committee to which the Supervisor has been
appointed by the Board of Supervisors;
c. Any meeting of a Board of County Commissioners or County Council of the
county in which the Supervisor resides;
d. County Association meeting;
e. Officer and member meetings of Executive Boards;
f. Annual meetings of the State Association of Township Supervisors;
g. Meeting where the Supervisor is a member of the Executive Committee or
Trustee of the Association.
Miller, 13-020
Page 10
h. In order for a Supervisor to receive his/her employee wages, the Board of
Supervisors must vote to approve it if \[the Supervisor’s\] presence is required
at an event, meeting, function, etc.
38. Between January 2010 and May 2013, Miller’s time cards reflect occasions when
Miller claimed Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster compensation while attending
Supervisor meetings, or Supervisor related functions, for which the Board did not
approve Miller to receive an employee wage while attending, as follows:
a. 2010 – $301.00; 2011 – $135.33; 2012 – $116.00; 2013 - $43.50.
b. Miller claimed a total of approximately forty-two (42) hours of Roadmaster or
Assistant Roadmaster compensation while attending Supervisor meetings or
Supervisor related functions during the time period of 2010 through 2013.
c. Miller was compensated a total of approximately $595.83 when she claimed
Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster compensation while attending
Supervisor meetings or Supervisor related functions during the time period
of 2010 through 2013 which were not approved by the Board of Supervisors.
d. The amount of compensation received by Miller, as delineated within this
paragraph ($595.83), is deemed to be a de minimis amount as per State
Ethics Commission Orders Fidler, Order No. 1637 and Moyer, Order No.
1638.
39. Miller provided a statement to Commission Investigators on September 8, 2014,
during which she asserted that she was not compensated for all hours recorded on
her time cards.
a. Miller indicated that in providing weekly/biweekly documentation seeking
compensation in regards to her position as Roadmaster, Miller would
routinely seek compensation for hours less than those which were actually
worked by her in regards to her position as Roadmaster.
40. Secretary-Treasurer McNulty \[sic\] confirmed that Miller would submit requests for
compensation for hours which were less than the actual hours which were
documented by Miller.
41. Miller would record hours on time statements for which she was subsequently not
compensated.
a. Miller asserted those hours were “donated” to the Township.
b. No records exist documenting the type of services performed.
42. The following details the hours worked by Miller between 2010 and 2013 and the
actual number of hours for which Miller was compensated:
Year Hours Number of Difference
Recorded by Hours of Hours
Township Compensatio
Time Card n was Actually
Paid
2010 1,436.65 1,214.00 222.65
2011 1,590.26 1,321.50 268.76
2012 1,351.80 1,287.65 64.15
Miller, 13-020
Page 11
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO THE ALLEGATION THAT MILLER USED
THE AUTHORITY OF HER PUBLIC OFFICE/EMPLOYMENT FOR A PRIVATE
PECUNIARY BENEFIT INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO UTILIZING OFFICE SPACE,
EQUIPMENT AND/OR MATERIALS OF THE TOWNSHIP BUSINESS OFFICE TO
FURTHER HER RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN FOR TOWNSHIP SUPERVISOR.
43. Miller’s term as an elected Supervisor was to conclude on December 31, 2013,
unless \[she was\] re-elected during the 2013 general election.
a. Miller campaigned for re-election during the early part of 2013 seeking to win
the Primary Election.
44. During Miller’s 2013 campaign for re-election, Miller solicited campaign assistance
from Susan Lape, a friend.
a. Lape supported Miller’s candidacy for Supervisor in 2007 by knocking on
doors and asking Township residents to vote for Miller.
b. Lape is employed as a Secretary for the Amatangelo, Baisley & Walsh law
firm located at 100 4th Street, Donora, PA 15033.
45. Miller used her office in the Township municipal building, Township fax machine
and telephones in furtherance of her re-election campaign.
46. On March 20, 2013, at approximately 11:24 a.m., Miller had a telephonic
conversation with Lape in Miller’s Township Supervisor office.
a. Miller informed Lape that Miller was available on the night of March 20,
2013, or March 21, 2013, to meet sometime between 5:30 p.m. and 6:00
p.m. at the Township building to work on a newspaper article rebuttal and to
create a candidate profile to be published in the local newspaper.
47. Miller’s Roadmaster time card for March 20, 2013, documents that Miller claimed
compensation for performing Roadmaster duties during the time frame of 8:36 a.m.
to 3:30 p.m. and 5:20 p.m. to 6:55 p.m.
a. The Township office is closed to the public between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to
*
3:30 p.m.
*
\[sic\] \[Cf., Fact Finding 10 a(1).\]
b. The Township Road Crew does not typically work between the hours of 5:20
p.m. to 6:55 p.m.
c. There was no Township Roadmaster to conduct \[sic\] between 5:20 p.m. and
6:50 p.m.
d. Miller claimed time for compensation as Roadmaster while conducting
campaign related activities with Lape.
e. Miller was paid $14.50/hour by the Township while conducting re-election
strategy with Lape in the Township municipal building.
48. On March 21, 2013, at 10:30 a.m. a two (2) page fax from the Amatangelo, Baisley
& Walsh law firm was received at the Township building.
Miller, 13-020
Page 12
a. The first page of the fax was a one page response to a newspaper article.
b. The second page of the fax was a document entitled “Jamie Miller Running
for Re-Election as Washington Township Supervisor.”
c. The transmission information recorded at the top of each fax page identified
the following “03/21/2013 10:30 7243796711 AMATANGELO.”
d. On March 21, 2013, the Township had no matters pending with Amatangelo,
Baisley & Walsh law firm.
e. Miller’s only connection to Amatangelo, Baisley & Walsh at that time was
campaign related matters with Lape.
49. Lape faxed the campaign related documents to the Township building for Miller’s
review.
a. Lape obtained Miller’s permission to fax the information to the Township
prior to sending the fax.
b. Miller retrieved the fax from the Township fax machine.
50. Miller had previously provided Lape with handwritten versions of the documents
and instructed Lape to type them.
a. Miller requested that Lape provide any input/corrections that might be
needed to improve the documents.
51. The document entitled “Jamie Miller Running for Re-Election as Washington
Township Supervisor” was to be published in a local newspaper to support Miller’s
re-election.
a. The document references Township related matters that Miller was involved
in during her tenure as Supervisor/Roadmaster and why Miller should be re-
elected.
52. Miller’s time card for March 21, 2013, indicates that Miller claimed compensation as
a Roadmaster from 7:55 a.m. to 2:44 p.m.
a. Miller was compensated as Roadmaster while simultaneously conducting
campaign related activities.
b. Miller was compensated at the rate of $14.50/hour in 2013 as Roadmaster.
53. On March 25, 2013, at approximately 9:21 a.m., a second fax from the Amatangelo,
Baisley & Walsh law firm was received at the Township building.
a. The second fax included the same two (2) documents as the first fax did but
with revisions made to both documents.
b. The transmission information recorded at the top of each fax page identified
the following “03/25/2013 09:21 7243796711 AMATANGELO.”
54. Lape faxed the revised documents to the Township building for Miller’s review.
a. Lape obtained Miller’s permission to fax the information to the Township
prior to sending the fax.
Miller, 13-020
Page 13
b. Miller obtained the fax from the Township fax machine.
55. On March 25, 2013, at 9:50 a.m., approximately thirty (30) minutes after receiving
Lape’s fax, Miller telephonically contacted Lape regarding the fax Lape sent to
Miller.
a. Miller discussed with Lape that she was pleased with the campaign
documents.
56. Miller’s time card for March 25, 2013, indicates that Miller claimed compensation as
a Roadmaster from 6:08 a.m. to 3:32 p.m.
a. Miller claimed time for compensation as Roadmaster while simultaneously
conducting campaign related activities.
57. Prior to April 3, 2013, Miller directed that Township employee Amy Naulty type a
document Miller verbalized to her entitled “Accomplishments over the Past Six
Years.”
a. The document was created during a normal work day for Amy Naulty.
b. It took approximately an hour and a half to create the document.
c. No other Supervisors were involved in the creation of the document.
58. The document listed twenty-four (24) accomplishments related to Township issues
that Miller was involved in as Supervisor/Roadmaster during her term in office.
a. The accomplishments included among others: purchasing equipment and
vehicles, obtaining grants, etc.
59. The accomplishment list did not specifically solicit a vote for Miller but was released
within a month of the primary election.
60. Miller placed multiple copies of the document in the foyer area of the Township
building and the hallway leading to the offices of the Supervisors.
a. No other Supervisors were involved in the placement of the accomplishment
list.
1. There was no vote or authorization from the Board of Supervisors
approving the placement of this document.
b. The primary purpose of Miller placing the document in the Township building
was to solicit support for her re-election.
61. Miller gave the document to residents she interacted with at the Township building.
62. Prior to May 14, 2013, Miller directed that Amy Naulty make alterations to the
accomplishment list as provided by Miller.
a. The document was created during a normal work day for Amy Naulty.
b. It took approximately one half hour to make the alterations.
1. Naulty was compensated at the rate of $12.00/hour in 2013.
Miller, 13-020
Page 14
c. No other Supervisors were involved in the alterations to the document.
d. The document title was changed to “Accomplishments over the Past Six
Years for the Washington Township Supervisors.”
63. On May 14, 2013, one week prior to the Primary Election, a revised version of the
accomplishment document was found in the Township copier along with three (3)
Municipal Authority of Washington Township Right-To-Know Response forms.
a. The three (3) Right-To-Know Response forms were provided to Miller by the
Authority regarding the compensation of Ricki Moody, employee of the
Municipal Authority of Washington Township.
1. Ricki Moody is the spouse of Dan Moody.
2. Dan Moody ran against Miller in 2013 for the Supervisor position.
64. The three (3) Right-To-Know responses issued to Miller by the Municipal Authority
of Washington Township (hereafter “Authority”) were the result of Miller filing three
(3) Right-To-Know requests with the Authority on April 9, 2013, at 10:43 a.m.
a. Miller’s time card for April 9, 2013, documents that Miller was claiming
Roadmaster compensation between 7:44 a.m. and 1:46 p.m. at or about the
same time she was filing Right-To-Know requests with the Authority.
b. The responses received by Miller were eventually used by Miller as
campaign literature to support her candidacy.
c. Miller claimed time for compensation as Roadmaster while conducting this
campaign related activity.
65. The accomplishment list along with the Right-To-Know response forms were mailed
and/or provided to potential voters to solicit support for Miller’s candidacy.
a. The Township Fire Department was one of the entities that received the
information.
66. During a statement provided to a Commission Investigator on September 8, 2014,
Miller stated the following:
a. The Supervisor stipend of $100.00 (gross) per month was for performing
supervisory duties.
b. Roadmaster compensation was claimed by her for performing supervisory
duties.
1. The duties she performed that were supervisory in nature were brief
and lasted a few minutes per occurrence.
2. Supervisory duties performed by \[sic\] included the following:
aa. Answering the telephone;
bb. Running the vacuum cleaner in the Township building;
Miller, 13-020
Page 15
cc. Meeting with residents, listening to their concerns, and
directing them to the proper entity to have their concern
addressed.
c. Miller admitted claiming Roadmaster compensation while attending certain
Supervisor meetings for the following reason(s):
1. Part of the meetings concerned road related matters;
2. Inspecting/purchasing equipment to be used by Road Crew;
3. Interacting with residents regarding a variety of concerns (including
roads);
4. Preparing for meetings with officials and/or representatives regarding
a variety of issues (including, but not limited to, roads).
d. Roadmaster compensation was also claimed while attending the following:
1. The Fayette County Association of Township Supervisors
Conventions because said event provided Miller the opportunity to
interact with other Roadmasters and to review equipment to be
purchased for the Road Crew.
2. The Unemployment Compensation Class sponsored by the
Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors held on May
20, 2010, because said event related to the unemployment
compensation that the Road Crew is able to obtain.
3. The Township Municipal Authority Sewer Project Groundbreaking
event held on March 21, 2011, because some of the monies for the
project were to be used to repair Township roads.
4. A Township Municipal Authority meeting held on April 18, 2012,
because said meeting related to how roads were being affected by
the sewer project.
5. The PennDOT Automated Red Light Enforcement Grant Kick-off
meeting held on August 17, 2011, because the Road Crew is
responsible for the maintenance of the traffic light that was to be
purchased/serviced via the grant.
6. The PennDOT Fleet Management Class held on September 29, 2010,
so that she could familiarize herself with the type of equipment used
by the Road Crew and the limitations of the equipment.
7. Meeting with the Union representative of the Road Crew on March 21,
2013, because the meeting regarded the compensation of the Road
Crew.
e. Miller did not recall the meeting with an Aflac representative on April 15, 2013,
regarding insurance for the Road Crew.
f. Miller claimed that she had problems with the thumb recognition time card device
due to the device not being able to read her thumb print.
Miller, 13-020
Page 16
1. Problems Miller experienced with the device led to inaccuracies that were
reflected on her thumb recognition time card printouts.
2. The thumb recognition time card printouts that reflect that she claimed
compensation during the weekend days when the Road Crew was removing
snow are inaccurate due to the aforementioned problem she had with the
device.
g. Township Secretary/Treasurer Amy Naulty was responsible for keeping track of the
time that Miller worked as a Roadmaster but did not claim for Roadmaster
compensation.
h. Days that Miller claimed Roadmaster compensation while working past 4:00 p.m.
could have resulted from:
1. A resident wanting to meet with Miller before the Township building doors
were closed;
2. A scheduled meeting with the Township Engineer or a PennDOT official.
i. Miller confirmed that a mailing was sent to potential voters in 2013 advocating for
her re- election.
1. The mailing included a cover letter that identified accomplishments Miller
made as Supervisor.
2. The mailing did not include the Accomplishment List or the Right-To-Know
Responses Miller obtained from the Municipal Authority in April of 2013.
3. The cover letter identified some of the same information that was indicated
on the Accomplishment List.
j. Miller denied that the three Right-To-Know requests she submitted to the Authority
on April 9, 2013, regarding the compensation of Ricki Moody were done so for
campaign related reasons.
1. Miller “just wanted to know” what Ricki Moody’s compensation was
approximately a month before the Primary Election.
k. Miller denied that the three Right-To-Know responses she received from the
Authority were distributed as campaign literature to advocate for her re-election.
l. Miller confirmed that she was involved in the creation of the Accomplishment List
by:
1. Informing Amy Naulty what information to include in the document;
2. Making copies of the document and placing them in the Township building
for taxpayers to obtain.
m. The purpose of the Accomplishment List was to inform the taxpayers what
accomplishments were made by Miller within the last six years.
1. Miller acknowledged that an Accomplishment List was not created during
any other year of her incumbency.
Miller, 13-020
Page 17
2. Miller admitted that the year in which the Accomplishment List was first
generated was the year in which she was running for re-election.
n. The Accomplishment List was not distributed to taxpayers by her because the list
was made available for pick-up at the Township building.
1. The list was made available for pick-up by copies of the document being
placed on a table in the foyer area of the Township building.
o. Miller admitted that two facsimile transmissions (the first sent on March 21, 2013,
and the second on March 25, 2013) were sent to the Township building regarding
Miller’s candidate profile that was to be published in the Valley Independent to
inform the public of Miller’s interest in being re-elected as Supervisor.
1. Miller denied that she requested the two facsimiles be sent to her at the
Township building.
2. After Miller received the first fax on March 21, 2013, that included her
candidate profile, Miller did not advise Lape to stop sending campaign
related material to Miller at the Township building.
3. Miller could not recall if she telephoned Lape after receiving the facsimiles to
discuss the contents of them.
p. The candidate profile was first drafted by Miller and discussed with Lape at Lape’s
residence on or about March 20, 2013.
q. Miller denied that she and Lape ever conducted campaign related activities at the
Township building.
67. The total amount of Township time and Township equipment used by Miller for
campaign related purposes could not be documented.
68. Miller obtained a private pecuniary benefit as a result of claiming hours for
compensation as Roadmaster, which were related to her elected Supervisor
position ($595.83), and claiming and receiving compensation for emergency snow
removal which she did not work ($518.70); however, said amounts are deemed to
be de minimis as per State Ethics Commission Orders Fidler, Order No. 1637 and
Moyer, Order No. 1638.
III.DISCUSSION:
As a Supervisor for Washington Township, Fayette County, from September 19,
2007, through December 31, 2013, Respondent Jamie Miller, hereinafter also referred to
as “Respondent,” “Respondent Miller,” and “Miller,” has been a public official/public
employeesubject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics
Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
The allegation is that Respondent Millerviolated Section1103(a)of the Ethics Act
when she used the authority of her public office/employment for a private pecuniary benefit
including but not limited to utilizing office space, equipment and/or materials of the
Township Business Office to further her re-election campaign for Township Supervisor,
and when she claimed salary/wages as a Roadmaster while performing the duties of
Township Supervisor.
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:
Miller, 13-020
Page 18
§ 1103. Restricted activities
(a)Conflict of interest.—
No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of
interest.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a).
The term "conflict of interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest."
Use by a public
official or public employee of the authority of his office or
employment or any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for the private
pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family
or a business with which he or a member of his immediate
family is associated. The term does not include an action
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.
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”).
Miller served as a Township Supervisor from September 19, 2007, through December 31,
2013. Miller served as Vice Chairman of the Board and Assistant Roadmaster in 2008 and
2009, and as Assistant Secretary/Treasurer and Roadmaster in 2010, 2011, 2012, and
2013.
In 2013, Miller used Township office space, equipment and/or materials in
furtherance of her re-election campaign. The total amount of Township time and Township
equipment used by Miller for campaign related purposes could not be documented. The
parties have stipulated that on a few days in March 2013, Miller conducted re-election
strategy from the Township municipal building and/or received campaign related
documents faxed to the Township building. On March 20, 2013, March 21, 2013, and
March 25, 2013, Miller claimed time for compensation as Roadmaster while conducting
campaign related activities. Also, at Miller’s direction, Township Secretary/Treasurer Amy
Naulty (“Naulty”) prepared a list of accomplishments Miller was involved in as
Supervisor/Roadmaster (the “Accomplishment List”), which Miller placed in the Township
building and provided to potential voters to solicit support for Miller’s candidacy. Naulty’s
work on the Accomplishment List consumed approximately two hours of Township time.
Miller, 13-020
Page 19
No other Township Supervisors were involved in creating the Accomplishment List, and the
Board did not authorize its placement in the Township building. The primary purpose of
Miller placing the Accomplishment List in the Township building was to solicit support for
her re-election.
Miller claimed compensation as a Roadmaster for time spent on April 9, 2013, filing
Right-To-Know requests for information used to support her candidacy.
Per the Consent Agreement, the parties are in agreement that the private pecuniary
benefit Miller realized by using Township office space, equipment and/or materials to
further her re-election campaign was de minimis.
In addition to the above, the parties have stipulated that during the time period of
2010 through 2013, Miller received unauthorized compensation totaling approximately
$595.83 when she claimed Roadmaster or Assistant Roadmaster compensation while
attending Supervisor meetings or Supervisor related functions. The parties have
stipulated that Miller obtained a private pecuniary benefit as a result of claiming hours for
compensation as Roadmaster which were related to her elected Supervisor position
($595.83); however, the parties are in agreement that said amounts are de minimis as per
Fidler, Order No. 1637 and Moyer, Order No. 1638.
Between 2010 and January 2012, Miller claimed 37.05 hours during times that the
Road Crew was working on snow removal. Miller did not work with the Road Crew during
this time. Miller was compensated $518.70 ($14.00/hr. x 37.05 hrs.) for time claimed
during snow removal. The parties have stipulated that Miller obtained a private pecuniary
benefit as a result of claiming and receiving compensation for emergency snow removal
which she did not work ($518.70); however, the parties are in agreement that said amounts
are de minimis as per Fidler, supra, and Moyer, supra.
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 allegation:
a. That no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1103(a), occurred when Jamie Miller realized a
de minimis pecuniary benefit when, by nature of
her public position, she utilized office space,
equipment and/or materials of the Township
Business Office to further her re-election
campaign for Township Supervisor; and
b. That no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1103(a), occurred when Jamie Miller realized a
de minimis pecuniary benefit when she claimed
salary/wages as a Roadmaster while performing
the duties of Township Supervisor.
4. The Investigative Division and Miller request that the State
Ethics Commission make no specific recommendations to any
Miller, 13-020
Page 20
law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter.
The parties acknowledge that:
a. All orders are provided to the Attorney General
as a matter of course;
b. All orders become public records and may be
acted upon by law enforcement authority(ies) as
they deem appropriate; and
c. The Commission is not prohibited from
cooperating with any other authority that may so
choose to review this matter further.
Consent Agreement, at 2.
We do not condone Respondent’s conduct; nevertheless, due to the applicability of
the de minimis exclusion to the Ethics Act’s definition of “conflict” or “conflict of interest,”
we accept the parties’ recommendations for determining that Respondent did not violate
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act.
Accordingly, we hold that no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Respondent Miller realized a de minimis pecuniary
benefit when she utilized office space, equipment and/or materials of the Township
Business Office to further her 2013 re-election campaign for Township Supervisor.
We further hold that no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §
1103(a), occurred when Respondent Miller realized a de minimis pecuniary benefit when
she claimed salary/wages as a Roadmaster while performing the duties of Township
Supervisor.
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 set forth in the Stipulation of Findings. We
note that the parties have requested that this Commission make no specific
recommendations to any law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter. It
is our determination that this matter shall be referred to the United States Attorney for the
Western District of Pennsylvania, the Office of Attorney General of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, and the District Attorney of Fayette County for review for whatever action
they may deem appropriate.
IV.CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. As a Supervisor for Washington Township, Fayette County, from September 19,
2007, through December 31, 2013, Respondent Jamie Miller (“Miller”) has been a
public official/public employeesubject to the provisions of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
2. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Miller realized a de minimis pecuniary benefit when she utilized office space,
equipment and/or materials of the Township Business Office to further her 2013 re-
election campaign for Township Supervisor.
3. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Miller realized a de minimis pecuniary benefit when she claimed salary/wages
as a Roadmaster while performing the duties of Township Supervisor.
Miller, 13-020
Page 21
In Re: Jamie Miller, : File Docket: 13-020
Respondent : Date Decided: 10/6/15
: Date Mailed: 10/19/15
ORDER NO. 1681
1. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act
(“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Jamie Miller, as a Supervisor
for Washington Township, Fayette County, realized a de minimis pecuniary benefit
when she utilized office space, equipment and/or materials of the Township
Business Office to further her 2013 re-election campaign for Township Supervisor.
2. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred
when Miller realized a de minimis pecuniary benefit when she claimed salary/wages
as a Roadmaster while performing the duties of Township Supervisor.
3. This matter shall be referred to the United States Attorney for the Western District
of Pennsylvania, the Office of Attorney General of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, and the District Attorney of Fayette County for review for whatever
action they may deem appropriate.
BY THE COMMISSION,
___________________________
Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair