Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1706 EvansSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 In Re: Evelyn Evans, File Docket: Respondent X -ref: Date Decided: Date Mailed: 15 -001 Order No. 1706 1124117 1127117 Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair Roger Nick 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 se g., 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 Evelyn L. Evans, a public official /public employee in her capacity as a Member and President of the Hanover Area School District Board of Directors, Luzerne County, violated Section 1103(a) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) when she utilized the authority of her ublic position in an effort to acquire and/or attempt to acquire a private pecuniary benefit for a member of her immediate family, namely her son, Edward Evans, when she influenced and/or attempted to influence Members of the School Board of Directors to take action regarding her son's employment status with the District. 11. FINDINGS. 1. Evelyn Evans has served as a Member of the Hanover Area Board of School Directors since approximately 1995. a. Evelyn Evans held the position of Board President during 2013 and 2014. b. The Hanover Area School District is governed by a nine (9) Member, elected Board of School Directors. 2. The District's day-to-day perations are overseen by an appointed Superintendent who reports directly to the Board of School Directors, primarily through the Board President. a. District administrative positions such as the Business Manager, school principals, administrative staff and teachers all report directly or indirectly to the Superintendent, through the District's chain of command. P.®. BOX 1 1470, HARRISBURG, PA 17 108-1470 • 7 17-783-16 1 0 ® 1-800-932-0936 ® www.ethics.state.pa.us Evans, 15 -001 a�ge2 3. The Board retains the services of a Solicitor for representation on legal matters affecting the Board and the Hanover Area School District. a. Outside legal counsel is hired by the District situationally, on an as- needed basis. b. Outside legal counsel hired by the District generally advises the Board through either the Solicitor or Superintendent. 4. The Hanover Area School District's Board of School Directors generally holds one (1) work session and one (1) regular meeting per month. a. Board work session meetings are normally held the first Monday of each month. b. Regular Board meetings are normally held the first Thursday of each month. C. Special Board meetings are held on an as- needed basis. 5. The Hanover Area School District does not maintain any official records memorializing discussions occurring during Board work session meetings. a. A meeting agenda is prepared by administrative staff which is then used for the regular meeting held on the Thursday after the work session meeting. 1. The meeting agenda typically includes items which will require Board approval during the Board's regular meeting. b. Board work session meetings are open to the general public. C. The District's Superintendent, Business Manager and Solicitor typically attend Board work session meetings in addition to Members of the Board of School Directors. d. The District also does not maintain any records identifying Board Members, District officials, or members of the general public who attend work session meetings. 0. Edward Evans is the son of Hanover Area School Board Member Evelyn Evans. a. Edward Evans was employed by the Hanover Area School District in a teaching capacity from approximately March 3, 2003, until his resignation effective January 31, 2015. 7. On March 11, 2013, a District student informed High School Guidance Counselor Michelle Zapotoski of a sexual encounter the student had with teacher Edward Evans at Edward Evans' residence on March 10, 2013. a. Zapotoski is legally mandated to report any suspected occurrences of teacher /student sexual contact. b. Based upon this mandatory reporting requirement, Zapotoski reported the information to High School Principal Daniel Malloy and through the chain of command to the District Superintendent and Solicitor on March 11, 2013. C. On March 11, 2013, the student was formally interviewed by Zapotoski and Malloy. Evans, 15 -001 7age 3 1. During this interview, the student denied a sexual encounter occurred with Edward Evans and claimed that the student had lied about the encounter. 8. Subsequent to the allegations made b the student, Principal Malloy and Superintendent Anthony Podczasy met with Edward Evanson March 11, 2013, to discuss the matter. a. During this meeting, Edward Evans admitted to taking the student to his home. b. As a result, Edward Evans received a five -day suspension, without pay, from his teaching position with the District for "exercising extremely poorjudygment in engaging in inappropriate contact with a student." C. Edward Evans' suspension without pay was effective Friday, March 22, 2013, continuing through and including April 2, 2013. 9. Prior to suspending Edward Evans on March 21, 2013, Hanover Area School District administrators consulted with Special Labor Counsel John Audi regarding issues related to teacher /student relationships. 10. On or about March 12, 2013, one day after the student reported the encounter and Edward Evans met with District administrators, Evelyn Evans contacted District Solicitor George Shovlin regarding her son's situation. a. During the conversation, Evelyn Evans told Solicitor Shovlin that Malloy and Zapotoski were on a "witch hunt" and that Malloy was "badgering" the student who made the allegations. b. Solicitor Shovlin advised Evelyn Evans that she needed to refrain from any contacts or participation in the matter given the fact that she was the School Board President and her son was involved. C. Solicitor Shovlin informed Malloy of Evelyn Evans' comments on or about March 15, 2013. 11. Evelyn Evans ignored Solicitor Shovlin's directive to refrain from contacts regarding the matter and telephonically contacted Malloy on March 15, 2013. a. Malloy was unavailable to take Evelyn Evans' initial call. b. Evelyn Evans left Malloy a message requesting that he return her call. C. Malloy returned Evelyn Evans' call later that day. 12. During the call of March 15, 2013, Evelyn Evans complained to Malloy that a teacher was openly discussing her son's situation during class and that a student was sharing a news article on the matter. a. Evelyn Evans went on to complain to Malloy stating that "isn't [it] a shame what they are saying about my Eddie." b. High School Principal Malloy was a subordinate employee to Board President Evelyn Evans through the District's chain of command. 1. Malloy reports directly to the Superintendent. Evans, 15 -001 age 4 2. The Board approves the hiring of all District administrators, including principals. C. Evelyn Evans was President of the School Board at this time. 13. Around AprillMay 2013, Edward Evans filed a grievance through the teachers union over his one -week suspension in March 2013, seeking back pay. a. The Superintendent informed the Board, except Evelyn Evans, of Edward Evans' grievance. b. The Solicitor was authorized to represent the District in the process. 14. Superintendent Andrew Kuhl, Solicitor George Shovlin and Labor Counsel John Audi assumed responsibility for handling the District's involvement in the Edward Evans grievance process. a.. Andrew Kuhl replaced Anthony Podczasy as the District's Superintendent in July 2013. b. Superintendent Kuhl reviewed the matter shortly after being appointed and decided to oppose Edward Evans' grievance. 15. Shortly after becoming Superintendent in July 2013, Andrew Kuhl was contacted by Evelyn Evans numerous times regarding her son Edward Evans. a. When making contact, Evelyn Evans asked Kuhl if he had heard about what happened to Evans' son and would proceed to make unflattering and derogatory comments about the student who made the allegations against Edward Evans. b. Evelyn Evans' contact with Superintendent Kuhl occurred approximately four 1 )months after being instructed by Solicitor George Shovlin not to interject herself in the Edward Evans matter. C. These contacts occurred around the same time Superintendent Kuhl decided to move forward with the grievance process regarding Evans' son. d. Evelyn Evans was President of the Hanover Area Board of School Directors at the time she was approaching Superintendent Kuhl about her son. e. Superintendent Kuhl was a direct report to Evelyn Evans, the School Board President, in the District's formal chain of command. f. Evelyn Evans' comments were in an attempt to discredit witnesses, minimize the matter and to influence the Superintendent's decision regarding the grievance. 16. Around the beginning of December 2013, Superintendent Kuhl and attorneys Shovlin and Audi began preparing for the grievance proceeding anticipated to start in January of 2014. a. In preparation for the grievance process, District officials met with the student who made the allegations against Edward Evans that resulted in the suspension. b. The meeting with the student took place at the school on December 12, Evans, 15 -001 Page S 2013. Present in the room for the meeting along with the student was District Solicitor Shovlin, Special Labor Counsel John Audi, Superintendent Andrew Kuhl and Guidance Counselor Michelle Zapotoski. C. During the December 12, 2013, meeting, the student reiterated the initial version of the events alleged to have occurred with Edward Evans as first reported to Zapotoski on March 11, 2013. 17. As a result of the student's statement, Hanover Area School District administrators suspended Edward Evans with pay from his teaching position with the District effective December 12, 2013. a. The District also referred the matter to the Hanover Township Police Department due to the nature of the allegation. 1. Edward Evans was criminally charged by the Hanover Township Police on January 7, 2014. b. Edward Evans' suspension was changed to without pay status effective January 7, 2014, as a result of the criminal charges. 18. District Solicitor Shovlin prepared a press release and addressed the suspension of Edward Evans during the School Board meeting on January 9, 2014. a. Evelyn Evans was absent from this meeting. b. Solicitor Shovlin's press release was distributed to Hanover Area School Board Members and the general public. C. The press release addressed Evelyn Evans' participation in the matter and potential Board actions regarding Edward Evans' continued employment with the Hanover Area School District. 19. Minutes from the Board of School Directors January 9, 2014, meeting included the following excerpts from Solicitor Shovlin's presentation to the Board and public regarding Evelyn Evans' participation in Board actions affecting her son: a. "Earlier this week, the Hanover Township Police filed felony criminal charges against Mr. Evans, while the School District continued the suspension of Mr. Evans indefinitely, now without pay, pending the disposition of the criminal case or the receipt of sufficient evidence to proceed with an employment termination hearing. If convicted of the criminal charges, or, if the School District obtains sufficient evidence to proceed with an employment termination hearing any earlier, the School District will seek to terminate Mr. Evans' employment with the School District and to have his teaching certification permanently revoked by the Pennsylvania Department of Education." "On another note, much has been said in the press about the fact that Evelyn Evans, School Board President, is the mother of Edward Evans, resulting in rumors and innuendos about what impact that has had in this case. The facts are that Evelyn Evans immediately removed herself from this matter when it first came to 1 ht on March of 2013 and she has stayed out of it ever since that time. The School District administration has conducted its investigation without any interference by Mrs. Evans or any Evans, 15 -001 TI-a-g—e 6 other member of the School Board. All interaction in this matter between the Administration and the School Board has been with Mr. Joseph Steininger, Vice - President of the Board and the rest of the Board, excluding Mrs. Evans." b. This same information was included as part of the District's press release on the matter. 20. During 2014 the Hanover Area Board of School Directors consisted of Evelyn Evans, President, Joseph Steininger, Vice - President, and Members Paul Holmgren, Lorraine Heydt, Frank Ciavarella, Jr., John Mahle, Stacy McGovern, John Pericci and Kevin Quaglia. 21. Edward Evans filed an unemployment compensation claim with the Scranton Unemployment Compensation Center on January 12, 2014. a. As a matter of standard operating procedures, the Hanover Area School District, through its administrative ersonnel, challenges unemployment compensation claims made against the District when alleged misconduct is the reason for the termination of employment by the District. b. Unemployment compensation claims filed against the District are the responsibility of the administration and do not require Board involvement. C. Documentation required for any challenge or appeal is organized and presented by the District administrators, primarily the Business Manager, with reviews from legal counsel if warranted. Thomas Cipriano was employed as the Hanover Area School District Business Manager throughout this process. 2. The District also used the services of Solicitor George Shovlin and Special Labor Counsel John Audi during this timeframe. d. As part of the District's presentationlappeal, Business Manager Cipriano compiled and provided to the Unemployment Compensation Review Board records detailing wages paid by the District to Edward Evans. e. A determination was made by the Unemployment Compensation Officer on February 4, 2014, that Edward Evans was eligible for unemployment compensation. The District filed an appeal on February 18, 2014, with a hearing being held April 14, 2014. 22. Even though she had been advised by Solicitor Shovlin, both privately and in the presence of other Board Members, to refrain from commenting on and participating in the Edward Evans matter, Evelyn Evans interjected herself at the Board level on matters including his unemployment claim, criminal trial and employment status of her son, Edward Evans. a. Evans selectively targeted District administrators, staff and outside legal counsel challenging their credibility and calling their work product into question while they were engaged in activities affecting the employment status of her son, Edward Evans. b. Evelyn Evans sought out other Board Members during regular and work session meetings held during 2014 to discuss various aspects of her son's case and employment status in an attempt to influence decisions the Board Evans, 15 -001 age 7 was making regarding Edward Evans' continued employment with the Hanover Area School District. 23. Between January 2014 and April 2014, Evelyn Evans accused Business Manager Cipriano of misrepresenting and/or falsifying information on the District's response to Edward Evans unemployment claim during multiple Board Meetings. a. Evelyn Evans addressed the other eight (8) Board Members on her son's unemployment claim. b. Evans repeatedly questioned the accuracy of the unemployment claim response prepared by Cipriano in the ppresence of Board Members Steininger, Holmgren, Heydt, Ciavarella, Niahle, McGovern, Pericci and Quaglia. C. Evans continually made reference on multiple occasions that she believed a misrepresentation was made by Cipriano on the filing during additional meetings throughout 2014 in an effort: to question Cipriano's credibility. 24. During the regular School Board meeting of either February or March of 2014, Evelyn Evans confronted Cipriano about Edward Evans' salary information that Cipriano submitted to the Unemptoyment Compensation Board. a. Although School Board Members, including Evelyn Evans, have no role in this process, Evans accused Cipriano of misrepresenting salary information submitted by the District which was used to determine Edward Evans' unemployment compensation eligibility amounts. b Evelyn Evans accused Cipriano in the presence of other Board Members and administrators. C. Evans accused Cipriano of misrepresentations regarding her son even though she had been advised by the School District Solicitor to have no involvement in matters related to her son's employment. 25. Prior to Evelyn Evans accusing Cipriano of misrepresentations regarding her son, no Board Member had been involved in the process relating to an unemployment .compensation claim against the District. a. Evelyn Evans' actions were an effort to discredit the Business Manager and to affect the unemployment compensation amount her son may have been able to receive. b. Evelyn Evans was only able to interject herself in this process based on her position as President of the Hanover Area School Board. 26. During the same timeframe in 2014, when Evelyn Evans was attempting to discredit Business Manager Cipriano, she also took actions to discredit Special Labor Counsel John Audi by alleging that attorney Audi was overbilling the District for legal services relating to District labor contract negotiations. a. In 2014, Audi was providing legal services to the Hanover Area School District relating to collective bargaining agreements and the Edward Evans matter. 1. Audi had been providing legal services to the District since approximately 2011 with no questions regarding billing. Evans, 15 -001 age 8 b. As the District's Special Labor Counsel, John Audi serves at the pleasure of the School Board. Evelyn Evans was Board President at the time she made the overbilling allegations against Audi to Superintendent Kuhl. C. Board Members Holmgren, Ciavarella, Pericci, Quaglia and Steininger were present when Evelyn Evans questioned the legal fees being charged by Attorney John Audi. d. At the time Evelyn Evans made the allegations regarding Attorney Audi, he was assisting Cipriano with the District's response in the Edward Evans unemployment compensation claim against the District. Audi had no direct dealings with any Board Member, including Evans. e. Billing invoices submitted by Attorney Audi confirm that he provided the District with legal services related to Edward Evans' unemployment compensation claim from or about January 2014 to July 2014. Evelyn Evans' allegations prompted Superintendent Kuhl to review attorney Audi s invoices to ensure that no overbilling for legal services had occurred. g. Superintendent Kuhl's review of Attorney Audi's invoices concluded that Evelyn Evans' allegations of overbilling by Audi were unfounded. Evelyn Evans was Board President at the times she made the overbilling accusations. 27. Edward Evans was acquitted of criminal charges following a trial in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas on July 29 and 30, 2014. a. Edward Evans' employment status with the District at the time remained suspended without pay. b. Edward Evans continued to receive unemployment compensation at the time. 28. Hanover Area School District Guidance Counselor Michelle Zapotoski was among the individuals who provided testimony for the prosecution during Edward Evans criminal trial. a. After Zapotoski testified at Edward Evans' criminal trial, Evelyn Evans began accusing Zapotoski of inappropriate conduct to District administrators as a means to discredit Zapotoski. 29. Following her son's acquittal, Evelyn Evans also began lobbying the Board for Edward Evans' reinstatement as a teacher with the District. a. Evelyn Evans' efforts were not done publicly, but she used the authority of her public position as Board President to access Board Members, District administrators and the Solicitor during private Board work sessions. b. Evelyn Evans attempted to influence Board Members to rescind the suspension so that her son could be reinstated to his teaching position. C. Due to the nature of the allegations made against Edward Evans, District administrators and Board Members were reluctant to reinstate Edward Evans, 15 -001 Page Evans' teaching position with the District. The Board was considering options which included termination. 30. Evelyn Evans initiated contact with Board Members on behalf of her son following the conclusion of the July 30, 2014, trial on at least two (2) occasions following Board work sessions. 31. At the conclusion of the Board work session meeting held on August 4, 2014, Evans met privately with the Board Members present. a. As Board President, Evans directed that the Superintendent, Business Manager and Solicitor all leave the room prior to speaking to the Board Members in attendance. b. The only time the Superintendent, Business Manager, or Solicitor have been directed to leave a meeting was if there was to be a discussion relating to them, such as an employment contract or personnel issue. C. At no time previous had all three (3) been directed to leave a Board meeting at the same time. d. The Hanover Area School District does not maintain any minutes or attendance records from its Board work session meetings. No records exist confirming which Board Members were in attendance at the August 4, 2014, work session. 2. Not all Board Members were present on August 4, 2014. e. Evans' solicitations for support of her son to the Board lasted approximately fifteen (15) minutes on each occasion. 32. Since not all Board Members were not [sic] in attendance during the District's August 4, 2014, workshop, Evans again requested to speak to the Members in attendance at the September 2, 2014, work session. a. Board Member Kevin Quaglia was not present at the August 4, 2014, work session. 33. Following the Board workshop session held on Se p tember 2, 2014, Evelyn Evans again directed the Superintendent, Solicitor and Business Manger to exit the meeting so that she could privately address the Board. a. There were no matters pending affecting any of the administrators or solicitor that would require them to leave the meeting. b. Evans demanded that her son's employment suspension be removed allowing him to return to work. C. Evans instructed the Board that they had to take some action to resolve the matter since her son was found not guilty. d. No other District business was discussed by Evelyn Evans during either of these private meetings. 34. Evans' sole reason for meeting privately with the Board in August and September of 2014 was to influence the Board's decision regarding her son's employment. Evans, 15 -001 '10 a. At that time, the Board was considering terminating Edward Evans' employment with the District. 1. The Board was considering contracting with special labor counsel to investigative additional claims of inappropriate student contact made against Edward Evans. b. The Board's options at that time included termination, reinstatement or a settlement. 35. During both the August 4, 2014, and September 2, 2014, work sessions, Evelyn Evans` sole reason for meeting privately with the Board was to influence Board Members in attendance by making negative comments regarding witnesses who testified during the criminal trial in order to validate her demands that her son be reinstated. a. Evans was Board President at the time and continued to attempt to influence the Board regarding her son despite repeated direction by Solicitor Shovlin to abstain from discussing her son s employment with the Board. b. At the time of Evans` attempts to influence the Board Members, the Board was considering the future employment status of Edward Evans with the Hanover Area School District. 36. Board Members Steininger, Pericci and Holmgren attended both the August and September work sessions. a. Board Members McGovern, Quaglia, Heydt, Mahle and Ciavarella all recall attending at least one (1) of the two (2) work sessions. b. All Board Members recall Evans addressing the Board on behalf of her son following the conclusion of the work session. 37. Ali Board Members recall that the only purpose for Evelyn Evans addressing the Board after each of the work sessions was to discuss matters relating to her son. a. No other District business was brought up by Evans at either of these post - work session meetings with the Board. 38. Every Board Member recalled statements made by Evelyn Evans calling into question the credibility at the time of trial of the student accuser, Guidance Counselor Michelle Zapotoski, and other witnesses while attempting to influence the Board to reinstate her son to a teaching position with the Hanover Area School District. a. Evans informed Board Members of the economic hardship her son was experiencing as a result of his suspension without pay. b. Board Members recalled Evans telling them that her son should be brought back since he was found not guilty. 39. Board Member Stacy McGovern, who was present at one workshop session, recalled Evelyn Evans addressing the Board and criticizing several un -named District teachers who attended the criminal trial but did not have any recorded leave for those days. a. McGovern also recalled that Evans also expressed general concerns about Evans 15 -001 �i1 the employment status of her son. 40. Board Member Lorraine Heydt was present at one of the work sessions and recalled Evelyn Evans questioning why the Board had not made a decision on Evans' son's employment with the District. a. Evans wanted some action taken by the Board on her son's employment. b. Heydt further recalled Evans informing the Board that since her son was found not guilty, his pay should be reimbursed. 41. Board Member Frank Ciavarella was present at one (1) work session and stated Evans attempted to influence the Board by stating the following: • The Board can't believe all of the rumors about her son and that some people lied during the criminal trial. • Evans wanted to "clear the air" with the Board saying "my son didn't do this, people lied." 42. Board Member John Mahle recalled Evelyn Evans informing the Board at the work session he attended as follows: • Witnesses were not truthful during the criminal trial and that her son was innocent. • Evans questioned why Assistant High School Principal William Kane attended the criminal trial. • Kevin Quaglia told Evans that the Board shouldn't be discussing the matter with her and didn't want to hear what she had to say about it. • Mahle told Evans to just drop it. • Evans tried to convince the Board that her son wasn't the person that the public was making him out to be. 43. Board Member Kevin Quaglia recalled Evelyn Evans attempting to discuss the Edward Evans employment matter with him after the September 2, 2014, work session. a. Before the meeting, Evans told Quaglia that "I'd like to talk to you and go over what l talked about to the rest of the Board regarding the situation." b. Quaglia believed the situation to be the employment status of Edward Evans as a result of feedback he received from Board Members who attended the August 4, 2014, work session. C. Quaglia did not stay after the work shop session ended. d. At a meeting subsequent to the September 2, 2014, work shop, Evans again tried to discuss with Quaglia her son's employment with the District. Quaglia told Evans we are not to be discussing this and left the room. e. At various times after Edward Evans was accused of inappropriate contact with a student, Evelyn Evans made off - handed comments critical of District employees and questioned their integrity. Evans, 15 -001 X12 Quaglia believed the comments were an attempt to influence him and other Board Members. f. When in Quaglia's presence, Evans repeatedly referenced the financial hardships her son has endured as a result of the suspension. 44. Board Member Paul Holmgren attended both the August and September work sessions when Evelyn Evans addressed the Board regarding her son and recalled the following: a. Evans was trying to put her son in the most favorable view to the Board. b. Evans discussed the criminal trial including calling the student accuser a liar. C. Evans questioned why Assistant High School Principal William Kane and the District's Information Technology employee attended the trial. d. Evans stated that since her son was proven not guilty, he should get his job back with the District. 45. Board Member Joseph Steininger attended both work sessions and was present when Evelyn Evans addressed the Board on behalf of her son. a. Evans stated she wanted to inform the Board about the trial before they "heard it on the street." b. Evans accused the student of not being truthful. C. Evans attempted to discredit other witnesses including Michelle Zapotoski, accusing her of either not being truthful or not doing the right thing. d. Evans accused the District's Information Technology employee of attending the trial when he should have been at work at the District. 46. Board Member John Pericci recalled Evelyn Evans informing the Board that: a. Michelle Zapotoski, the student accuser and others all lied during the criminal trial. b. Evans made statements attempting to discredit the testimony of others and discussed testimony. C. Evans told the Board that since her son was not guilty, the Board should bring him back to work. 47. Following the acquittal of Evans' son on criminal charges, the Board's Solicitor and labor counsel recommended that the District seek special counsel to litigate the employment matter of Edward Evans. a. This recommendation was made in light of Evelyn Evans' continual use of her public position to discredit District administrators involved in the employee disciplinary process and her unfounded allegations of overcharges by District legal counsel, all of which was done to influence Board Members to reinstate her son. b. Solicitor Shovlin had advised Evelyn Evans beginning on or about March 15, 2013, through September 2014 to refrain from participation in any Board actions regarding her son and to cease contacting Board Members. Evans, 15 -001 X13 48. On September 4, 2014, the District voted to retain the services of Attorney Jeffrey Litts of Kegel, Almy and Lord, LLP, as independent special counsel for labor matters. a. Evelyn Evans abstained from the Board vote to hire Attorney Litts. b. The only labor matter Attorney Litts reviewed related to Edward Evans. 49. During Attorney Litts' review of the Edward Evans criminal matter, additional allegations surfaced that Edward Evans engaged in additional inappropriate contact with students on several occasions in the past. a. To assist in documenting those allegations, Attorney Litts attempted to contact the former students utilizing contact information in District files he received from Superintendent Kuhl. b. This contact of students occurred on or about October 3, 2014, based on Lifts' billing records. 50. Within days of Superintendent Kuhl providing student contact information to Attorney Litts, Kuhl was telephonically contacted by Evelyn Evans. a. Evelyn Evans chastised Kuhl for providing the contact information to Attorney Litts. b. Evelyn Evans became aware of Litts' inquiry relating to the alcohol allegations from a parent(s) of one of the former students Attorney Litts was attempting to contact. C. Evelyn Evans was aware that Lifts' inquiry included additional allegations against Edward Evans that would jeopardize any chances he had at reinstatement. d. Evelyn Evans made this contact with Kuhl even though she had been advised on numerous occasions by the Solicitor to refrain from any participation on matters regarding her son. Evans was advised as recently as September 2014 by the Solicitor to avoid any involvement in matters involving her son. 51. At the conclusion of his inquiry, Attorney Litts provided the District with a confidential investigative report, findings and recommendations dated December 2, 2014. a. Attorney Litts' investigative report was provided to the Hanover Area School Board for review and consideration during a special executive session held on December 10, 2014. 1. Litts' report concluded that if the students' testimony at an employment termination proceeding was consistent with prior testimony, there would be lawful grounds to terminate Mr. Evans' employment. b. Respondent Evelyn Evans was excluded from the distribution of this report and not present for this special executive session meeting. C. After Attorney Litts' report, the Board determined to enter into settlement discussions with Edward Evans. Evans, 15 -001 X14 52. Settlement discussions were handled by Attorney Jeff Litts on behalf of the District and private legal counsel representing Edward Evans. a. Attorney Litts provided periodic [proggress reports] to the District through contact with Superintendent Kuhl, Solicitor Shoviin and Special Labor Counsel Audi. 1. Settlement progress reports were then provided to Board Vice President Joseph Steininger. 2. Steiniger was Board Vice President during 2014 and became President during the Board's reorganization on December 3, 2014, for 2015. b. Board President Evelyn Evans was excluded from receiving any settlement progress reports. C. Settlement amounts considered by the District were based primarily on unpaid salary and benefit values covering the duration of Edward Evans' unpaid suspension from his District teaching position. d. Once a potential agreement was reached, a settlement proposal was presented to the Board for formal approval on February 5, 2015, 53. During the Hanover Area School Board's February 5, 2015, meeting, action was taken approving an Agreement and General Release with the Hanover Area Education Association and Edward Evans. a. Evelyn Evans was absent from this Board meeting. b. The basis for the agreement and general release was to resolve the employment status of Edward Evans with the District. C. Stated background information in the agreement reported: "Mr. Evans is currently suspended without pau (sic] from his teaching position with the School District. An arbitration hearing is currently scheduled for February 6, 2015 regarding pending grievances filed by the Association on Mr. Evans' behalf that challenge the validity of his unpaid suspension. The School District, Association and Mr. Evans voluntarily wish to enter into this Agreement to resolve those grievances and to otherwise conclude Mr. Evans' employment with the School District." d. Relevant terms and conditions of the Resignation Agreement and General Release include in part the following: "Mr. Evans acknowledges that this Agreement resolves any and all claims by Mr. Evans against the School District, including its officers, directors, agents and employees, past and present, with respect to any of the terms and conditions of his employment with the School District, his suspension from employment or his resignation from employment. Mr. Evans agrees to voluntarily resign from his employment with the District effective January 31, 2015. The School District shall make a single lump -sum payment to Mr. Evans in the amount of $95,442.00 by no later than February 10, 2015. Evans, 15 -001 X15 The Association and Mr. Evans agree that all pending grievances filed on Mr. rict sha l Evans behalf against the School Distl be withdrawn and discontinued." e. This Agreement was signed by Joseph Steininger as President of the Hanover Area Board of School Directors. 54. On February 4, 2015, the Hanover Area School District issued General Fund check number 00013022 in the amount of $95,442.00 to Edward Evans in settlement of the matter. a. [The] front side of this check contained the signatures of Board Members Joseph Steininger and Paul Holmgren. b. The reverse side of the check includes a signature for Edward Evans. 55. Between November 12, 2014, and March 13, 2015, Attorney Jeffrey Litts submitted five (5) invoices to the District which included charges of $19,388.30 for legal services relating to Edward Evans. 56. Hanover Area School District Business Manager Thomas Cipriano prepared a payroll history for Edward Evans covering the period September 6, 2013, through August 2015. a. This document was prepared in order to document compensation Edward Evans would have received from the District had he not been suspended without pay. b. Total compensation to Edward Evans as calculated by Cipriano for the period from January 11, 2014, through August 2015 was $102,783.70. 57. Evelyn Evans used the authority of her public position to attempt to influence Members of the Hanover Area School District Board of Directors to reinstate her son to a teaching position with the District following allegations and suspension of her son for inappropriate contact with a student. a. Between March 2013 and at least September 2014, Evans repeatedly criticized Hanover Area School District employees including the Business Manager and Guidance Counselor because of their official actions in the matter involving her son. b. Between March 2013 and September 2014 Evans accused attorneys representing the District in legal matters involving her son of overbilling. C. Evans' criticisms to discredit administrators and attorneys were an attempt to influence the Board to reinstate her son with back pay following his acquittal of criminal charges. d. Evans' attempts to influence the Board also included using her position as Board President to address the Board in private following work sessions in August and September 2014. e. Evans used her public position to repeatedly advise Board Members of the financial hardship her son experienced and advocated the Board reinstate her son to his teaching position. f. Evans was only able to have this access to the Board through her position as Evans, 15 -001 '16 President of the Hanover Area School District Board of [Directors]. III. DISCUSSION: As a Member and President of the Hanover Area School District ( "School District ") Board of Directors 4 "Board ") during 2013 and 2014, Respondent Evelyn Evans, also referred to herein as 'Respondent," Respondent Evans," and "Evans," was a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et sec . The allegation is that Respondent Evans violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she utilized the authority of her public position in an effort to acquire and/or attempt to acquire a private pecuniary benefit for a member of her immediate family, namely her son, Edward Evans, when she influenced and /or attempted to influence Members of the Board to take action regarding her son's employment status with the School District. Pursuant to Section 1103 (a) of the Ethics Act, a public official /public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest: § 1103. Restricted activities (a) Conflict of interest. ---No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a). The term "conflict of interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 1102. Definitions "Conflict" or "conflict of interest. " Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. The term does not include an action 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 ecuniary 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 Board consists of nine Members. Respondent Evans served as a Member of Evans 15 -001 Page � 7 the Board commencing approximately 1995. Respondent was both a Member and President of the Board during 2013 and 2014. The District's day -to -day operations are overseen by an appointed Superintendent who reports directly to the Board primaril through the Board President. Other School District administrators report directly or indirectly to the Superintendent. Respondent has a son named Edward Evans. Edward Evans was employed by the School District in a teaching capacity from approximately March 3, 2003, until his resignation effective January 31, 2015. On March 11, 2013, a School District student informed High School Guidance Counselor Michelle Zapotoski ( "Zapotoski ") that the student had a sexual encounter with Edward Evans at Edward Evans' residence on March 10, 2013. Zapotoski reported the information to High School Principal Daniel Malloy ( "Malloy ") and through the chain of command to then District Superintendent Anthony Podczasy and Solicitor George Shovlin ( "Shovlin "). Later that day, the student denied that a sexual encounter with Edward Evans had occurred and claimed that the student had lied about the encounter. However, Edward Evans admitted to taking the student to his home. On or about March 12, 2013, Respondent contacted Shovlin regarding her son's situation. Respondent told Shovlin that Malloy and Zapotoski were on a "witch hunt" and that Malloy was "badgering" the student who made the allegations. Shovlin advised Respondent that she needed to refrain from any contacts or participation in the matter given the fact that she was the School Board President and her son was involved. Respondent ignored Shoviin's directive. On March 15, 2013, Respondent contacted Malloy and complained that a teacher was openly discussing her son's situation during class and that a student was sharing a news article on the matter. Respondent stated to Malloy, "Isn't [it] a shame what they are saying about my Eddie." Fact Finding 12 a. On March 21, 2013, Edward Evans received a five -day suspension, without pay, from his teaching position effective Friday, March 22, 2013, through April 2, 2013. Around April /May 2013, Edward Evans filed a grievance seeking back pay for the aforesaid one -week suspension. In or after July 2013, Respondent contacted the School District's newly- appointed Superintendent, Andrew Kuhl ( "Kuhl "), regarding Edward Evans. When making contact, Respondent asked Kuhl if he had heard about what happened to Evans' son, and she proceeded to make unflattering and derogatory comments about the student who made the allegations against Edward Evans. Respondent's comments were made in an attempt to discredit witnesses, minimize the matter, and influence Kuhl's decision regarding the grievance. Kuhl decided to oppose Edward Evans' grievance. On December 12, 2013, in preparation for the grievance process, School District officials met with the student who made the allegations against Edward Evans that resulted in the suspension. During that meeting, the student reiterated the initial version of the alleged events. Asa resulf of the student's statement, Edward Evans was suspended with tay from his teaching position with the School District effective December 12, 2013, and he matter was referred to the Hanover Township Police Department. On January 7, 2014, Edward Evans was criminally charged by the Hanover Township Police. As a result of the criminal charges, Edward Evans' suspension was changed to without pay status effective January 7, 2014. On January 12, 2014, Edward Evans filed a claim for unemployment compensation. Evans, 15 -001 Page -'18 Respondent interjected herself at the Board level on matters including Edward Evans' unemployment compensation claim, criminal trial, and employment status. Respondent selectively targeted School District administrators, staff, and outside legal counsel, challenging their credibility and calling their work product into question while they were engaged in activities affecting the employment status of Edward Evans. Following a trial in the Luzerne County Court of Common Pleas on July 29 and 30, 2014, Edward Evans was acquitted of criminal charges. Edward Evans' employment status with the School District at the time remained suspended without pay, and he continued to receive unemployment compensation. Following her son's acquittal, Respondent attempted to influence Board Members to rescind the suspension so that her son could be reinstated to his teaching position. At the conclusion of Board work session meetings held on August 4, 2014, and September 2, 2014, Respondent met privately with the Board Members present. As Board President, Respondent directed that the Superintendent, Business Manager, and Solicitor all leave the room prior to Respondent speaking to the Board Members in attendance. On each of these occasions, Respondent solicited the Board for support of her son. No other School District business was discussed by Respondent during either of these private meetings. Respondent's sole reason for meeting privately with the Board on August 4, 2014, and September 2, 2014, was to influence the Board's decision regarding her son's employment. As detailed in the Fact Findings, every Board Member recalled statements made by Respondent calling into question the credibility at the time of trial of the student accuser as well as Zapotoski and other witnesses while attempting to influence the Board to reinstate her son to a teaching position with the School District. Respondent informed Board Members of the economic hardship her son was experiencing as a result of his suspension without pay. Board Members recalled Respondent telling them that her son should be brought back since he was found not guilty. Respondent engaged in these actions despite having previously received repeated direction from Shovlin to abstain from discussing her son's employment with the Board. On September 4, 2014, the Board voted to retain the services of Attorney Jeffrey Litts ( "Litts ") as independent special counsel for labor matters. During Litts' review of the Edward Evans criminal matter, additional allegations surfaced that Edward Evans engaged in additional inappropriate contact with students on several occasions in the past. To assist in documenting those allegations, Litts attempted to contact the former students utilizing contact information in School District files he received from Kuhl. Within days of Kuhl providing student contact information to Lifts, Respondent chastised Kuhl for providing the contact information to Litts. Respondent was aware that Litts' inquiry included additional allegations against Edward Evans that would jeopardize any chances he had at reinstatement. At the conclusion of his inquiry, Litts provided the School District with a confidential report dated December 2, 2014, which report concluded that if the students' testimony at an employment termination proceeding was consistent with prior testimony, there would be lawful grounds to terminate Edward Evans' employment. In February 2015, the Board approved a settlement agreement with Edward Evans whereby Edward Evans agreed to voluntarily resign from his employment with the School District effective January 31, 2015, and the School District agreed to make a single lump - sum payment to Edward Evans in the amount of $95,442.00. The School District's Business Manager calculated that had Edward Evans not been suspended without pay, total compensation to Edward Evans for the period from January 11, 2014, through August 2015 would have been $102,783.70. The parties have stipulated that Respondent used the authority of her public position Evans 15 -001 P �9 to attempt to influence Members of the Board to reinstate her son to a teaching position with the School District following allegations and suspension of her son for inappropriate contact with a student. Between March 2013 and at least September 2014, Respondent repeatedly criticized School District employees including the Business Manager and Guidance Counselor because of their official actions in the matter involving her son. Between March 2013 and September 2014, Respondent accused attorney(s) representing the School District in legal matters involving her son of overbilling. Respondent's criticisms to discredit administrators and attorneys were an attempt to influence the Board to reinstate her son with back pay following his acquittal of criminal charges. Respondent's attempts to influence the Board also included using her position as Board President to address the Board in private following work sessions in August and September 2014. Respondent used her public position to repeatedly advise Board Members of the financial hardship her son experienced and advocated the Board reinstate her son to his teaching position. Respondent was only able to have this access to the Board through her position as President of the Board. Having highligghted 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. Respondent denies having committed a violation of the Ethics Act. Nevertheless, for purposes of resolution given the terms of this settlement, she admits that if this matter went to hearing, the Investigative Division could prove by substantial clear and convincing evidence that she violated the Ethics Act. The parties agree to the following: In the event that this matter would proceed to an evidentiary hearing, the Investigative Division would present evidence that Evans, in her capacity as a Member of the Hanover Area School District Board of Directors, utilized the authority of her public office when she discussed, advocated, and lobbied for her son's reinstatement to a teaching position when she directed the Superintendent, Business Manager, and Solicitor to leave the room prior to her speaking to School Board Members in attendance for the purpose of convincing them that her son should be reinstated to his previously held teaching osition. Said evidence would constitute substantial clear and convincing evidence of an attempted violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a). 4. The Investigative Division and Respondent agree that the public's interest will not be adversely affected by this Consent Agreement. Evans agrees that she will neither seek nor hold any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at any time from the date of this agreement forward. 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 Evans, 15 -001 age 20 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. The Investigative Division will not seek reimbursement for any costs or fees associated with the investigation and prosecution of this matter. Consent Agreement, at 1--2. We find the Consent Agreement to be an appropriate resolution of this case. Although Respondent denies having committed a violation of the Ethics Act, she admits that if this matter went to hearing, the Investigative Division could prove that she violated the Ethics Act. In particular, if this matter would proceed to an evidentiary hearing, the Investigative Division would present evidence that Respondent utilized the authority of her ublic office when she discussed, advocated, and lobbied for her son's reinstatement to a eachin position when she directed the Superintendent, Business Manager, and Solicitor to leave the room prior to her speaking to Board Members in attendance for the purpose of convincing them that her son should be reinstated to his previously held teaching position. Although Respondent's son was not reinstated to his teaching position, an unsuccessful attempt to attain a private pecuniary benefit can be the basis for a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act (see, Vices, Order 1467; Barr, Order 1452; Scott, Order 1250; Metrick, Order 1037). To resolve this matter without further proceedings, Respondent has agreed that she will neither seek nor hold any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at any time from the date of the Consent Agreement (November 28, 2016) forward. The parties agree that the public's interest will not be adversely affected by the Consent Agreement. We conclude that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth a proper disposition for this case based upon the totality of the facts and circumstances. According/ , Respondent Evans is directed to fulfill the terms of the parties' Consent Agreement by neither seeking nor holding any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at any time from the date of the Consent Agreement (November 28, 2016) forward. 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: As a Member and President of the Hanover Area School District ( "School District ") Board of Directors ( "Board ") during 2013 and 2014, Respondent Evelyn Evans ( "Evans ") was a public official subject to the pprovisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seg. As to the allegation that Evans violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when she utilized the authority of her public position in an effort to acquire and/or attempt to acquire a private pecuniary benefit for a member of her immediate family, namely her son, Edward Evans, when she influenced and /or attempted to influence Members of the Board to take action regarding her son's employment status with the School District, this matter is appropriately resolved, without further proceedings, by Evans' agreement to neither seek nor hold any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at any time from the date of the parties' Consent Agreement (November 28, 2016) forward. In Re: Evelyn Evans, File Docket: 15 -001 Respondent Date Decided: 1124/17 Date Mailed: 1127117 ORDER NO. 1706 As to the allegation that Evelyn Evans ( "Evans "), a public official in her capacity as a Member and President of the Hanover Area School District ( "School District") Board of Directors "Board "), violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when she utilized the authority of her public position in an effort to acquire and/or attempt to acquire a private pecuniary benefit for a member of her immediate family, namely her son, Edward Evans, when she influenced and/or attempted to influence Members of the Board to take action regarding her son's employment status with the School District, this matter is appropriately resolved, without further proceedings, by Evans' agreement to neither seek nor hold any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at an time from the date of the parties' Consent Agreement (November 28, 2016 forward. Evans is directed to fulfill the terms of the parties` Consent Agreement by neither seeking nor holding any position of public office in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at any time from the date of the Consent Agreement (November 28, 2016) forward. a. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. b. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Pin- 117=611