HomeMy WebLinkAbout1714 MutterSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION
309 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
In Re: Glen A. Mutter, File Docket:
Respondent X -ref:
Date Decided
Date Mailed:
15 -033
Order No. 1714
617117
6122117
Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair
Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair
Roger Nick
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 seg., by the above -named Respondent. At the
commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent
written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the
Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as
an "Investigative Complaint." 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.
L ALLEGATIONS:
That Glenn Mutter, a public official/public employee, in his capacity as a Member
and President of Bally Borough Council, Berks County, violated [Sections 1103(a), 1104(d),
and 1105 (b) (5)] of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) when he utilized the authority of his
public position for the private pecuniary benefit of Leo Mutter (Respondent's father and
member of his immediate family) when he articipated in discussions and actions of the
Borough Council, including but not limiteTto lobbying, persuading, and attempting to
influence other Members of Council to increase the compensation of his father as a
Borough Manager; and when he subsequently voted to approve an annual budget for the
2013 and 2014 calendar years, which included an increase in compensation for his father,
resulting in a pecuniary benefit to his father and member of his immediate family; and when
Respondent failed to disclose G.A. Mutter Exteriors as a source of income on Statements
of Financial Interests filed with Bally Borough for calendar years 2011, 2013, and 2014.
IL FINDINGS:
Glenn A. Mutter has served as a Council Member for Bally Borough, Berks County
since in or around January 2001 to the present.
a. Mutter has served as the President of Borough Council since June 7, 2011.
2. A seven (7) Member Council governs Bally Borough.
P.O. BOX 11470, HARRISBURG, PA 17108-1470 • 717- 783 -1610 . 1 -800- 932 -0936 ® www.ethies.state.pa.us
M2 15 -033
P-ag--e--
a. Borough Council holds one legislative meeting on the first Tuesday of the
month.
b. Special meetings are held as necessary.
3. Council Members receive a yearly gross compensation of $600.00 for their service
on Borough Council.
a. Attendance at Council meetings is not required in order to receive Council
Member compensation.
b. Council Member compensation is paid at the end of the year.
4. Minutes of the Borough Council meetings are prepared by the Borough Secretary.
a. Council votes to approve the accuracy of the minutes at each subsequent
legislative meeting.
5. Borough Council is normally provided with a meeting packet for review several days
before each Borough Council meeting.
a. Information contained within the meeting packet includes agendas,
correspondence, etc.
b. The packets are either picked up by, or delivered to, the Council Members.
6. Borough Council votes to approve the bill lists at each monthly Council meeting.
a. The bill lists include all bills received, as well as monthly Borough payroll.
7. Voting at Council meetings occurs in a roll call fashion after a motion is made and
properly seconded.
a. All objections and/or abstentions cast are specifically noted within the
minutes.
1. Council does not utilize abstention forms to memorialize abstentions.
8. Signature authority over financial accounts, until recently, rested with Council
Members: Ed Agnoli, Matt Gehman, and Michael Bauman.
a. Ed Agnoli recently resigned from Borough Council.
b. Borough payroll checks require the signature of any two (2) of the three (3)
authorized signatories.
C. The Borough does not utilize a signature stamp; all signatures are live
signatures.
d. Borough Council President Glenn A. Mutter does not have signature
authority over any accounts.
9. Leo Mutter is the father and immediate family member of Glenn A. Mutter.
10. Leo Mutter served as a Bally Borough Council Member for a number of years
beginning in or around the 1970's or 1980's until 2010.
Mutter 15-033
9
a. Leo Mutter separated from service on Borough Council for approximately
four (4) years at some point in time.
b. Leo Mutter served as Borough Council President from at least in or around
2006 until 2010.
11. Leo Mutter became an employee of Bally Borough in or around January 2006,
assuming duties as Supervisor /Director of the Borough's Maintenance Department.
a. Leo Mutter's hourly rate of compensation was approximately $14.50 per
hour.
12. In 2007, Toni Hemerka ( "Hemerka "), who was employed as the Bally Borough
Manager, resigned in order to take a position as the Manager of Douglass
Township.
11 After Hemerka's resignation in 2007, Bally Borough Council did not take action to
hire another Manager.
a. From 2007 through 2010, the position of Borough Manager was vacant, a
decision Borough Council believed would be a cost savings to the Borough.
14. Following the departure of Hemerka in 2007, the Borough hired Andrea Delo to
serve as the Borough Secretary and handle administrative functions for the
Borough.
15. In or around 2010, Bally Borough Council believed there was a need to fill the
vacant full -time Borough Manager position.
a. In or around May 2010, Bally Borough Council took action to hire a Borough
Manager.
16. Acknowledging that Leo Mutter was already serving as the Maintenance Manager,
Bally Borough Council determined that Leo Mutter would be the best candidate.
a. Glenn A. Mutter did not lobby or recommend [that] his father, Leo Mutter, be
hired as the Borough Manager.
17. During the Bally Borough Council Meeting of May 4, 2010, Leo Mutter resigned his
position as a Borough Council Member.
18. Following Leo Mutter's resignation on May 4, 2010, Bally Borough Council
reorganized and named Christian Kopp as Council President and Glenn A. Mutter
as Vice- President.
a. Both Christian Kopp and Glenn A. Mutter abstained on the motions made to
appoint themselves as President and Vice - President of Borough Council.
19. Minutes of the Bally Borough Council Meeting for May 4, 2010, reflect that after the
reorganization of Council, appointing a new Council President and Vice - President, a
motion was made to appoint Leo Mutter as Borough Manager that was as follows:
a. A motion was made by Denise Sobjak, seconded by Thomas Leister,
appointing Leo Mutter as Borough Manager at a yearly salary of $49,625.00.
b. The motion was approved by Borough Council [with] "All Ayes," which
included Glenn A. Mutter participating in approving the motion.
Mutter, 15-033
P_a_ge4
20. While serving as the Borough Manager, Leo Mutter continued performing the duties
of Maintenance Manager.
21. Leo Mutter's job description as Manager of Bally Borough includes the following:
a. Responsible for all administrative actions between Council Meetings.
b. Attend all Council Meetings, and any other special meetings as needed.
C. Responsible to report to Council upon all affairs of the Borough and keep the
Council fully informed of the Borough's financial condition and needs.
d. Responsible for Borough purchases.
e. Assist in the investment of all Borough monies.
f. Supervise all Borough employees and establish daily work schedules.
g. Coordinate Borough projects with the Solicitor, Engineers and all state and
federal agencies.
h. Supervise all Borough projects and assist in seeking any available grant
money.
Provide all research or other information as requested from any Council
Member.
Supervise the maintenance and operation of the Community Pool.
k. Attend all meetings as requested.
Prepare the budget.
M. Appointed as Emergency Snow Director.
n. Maintain a good working relationship with all Borough businesses and
industries.
o. On call twenty -four (24) hours per day for any emergencies.
P. Safety Inspector. Responsible for loss control and risk management and any
necessary reporting to PennPrime.
22. As the Borough Manager, Leo Mutter did not utilize or record any action on time
sheets to document the hours he was working /claiming compensation.
a. Leo Mutter did, however, utilize a time card to punch in and out of each day's
work through a time clock, which identified and recorded the hours he
worked.
23. Leo Mutter's W -2 Wage and Tax Statements from Bally Borough reflected his
compensation from 2010 through 2012 as follows:
Year
Compensation 1
2010
$52,116.14
20
53,096.
20 2
53,226. 5
Mutter, 15 -033
a5
a. Leo Mutter's hourly rate of compensation in 2012 was $22.75 per hour.
Leo Mutter's hourly wage was based on a forty (40) hour workweek.
b. The hourly rate in 2010 was $22.20 per hour, and in 2011 it was $22.25 per
hour.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO THE ALLEGATIONS THAT GLENN A.
MUTTER PARTICIPATED IN DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS OF BOROUGH COUNCIL
TO INCREASE THE COMPENSATION OF HIS FATHER, LEO MUTTER, AS THE
BOROUGH MANAGER.
24. On December 4, 2012, immediately prior to the regularly scheduled public meeting
of Bally Borough, Borough Council held an executive session meeting.
a. [One of the matters discussed at the executive session] was the Borough
budget for calendar year 2013.
b. Included within the budget [discussions] were discussions as to Borough
employee salaries /wages, including that of Leo Mutter.
C. Glenn A. Mutter was present and participated in the executive session.
25. During the meeting of Council held on or about December 4, 2012, Respondent
Glenn A. Mutter recommended to Council that a salary increase be given to his
father, Leo Mutter.
a. Glenn A. Mutter opined that Leo Mutter worked excess hours for Bally
Borough beyond forty (40) hours a week, and that he did not claim many of
the hours he actually worked for the Borough.
b. Glenn A. Mutter sought the support of other Borough Council Members for a
salary increase [for] his father, based on the number of hours Leo Mutter was
believed to work for the Borough.
26. During the meeting of Council, a $2.00 per hour raise was approved for Leo Mutter,
regarding his compensation as Borough Manager.
a. Glenn A. Mutter's.efforts would be memorialized through a vote of Borough
Council at the public meeting held December 4, 2012.
27. At the Bally Borough Council Meeting on December 4, 2012, the following motion
was made, increasing salaries for Borough employees, including Leo Mutter:
A motion was made by Bobby Koch, seconded by Ron Gilbert,
to approve the following raises for 2013: Mike Roschel will get
$1.00 per hour; Leo Mutter will get $2.00 per hour and Andrea
Delo will get a $100.00 per week salary raise during the pool
months only for her work as Pool Manager. All ayes.
a. Glenn A. Mutter was present for this meeting in his capacity as a Bally
Borough Council Member and participated in approving the motion to grant
wage /salary increases for Borough employees, including his father, Leo
Mutter.
b. Leo Mutter was the only Borough employee receiving a $2.00 per hour pay
increase.
Mutter, 15 -033
a e�
28. In December 2013 and December 2014, Glenn A. Mutter participated in appprovingg
motions at Borough Council meetings to increase the compensation of all Borough
employees, which included a uniformly applied $0.45 per hour increase in 2014, and
a uniformly applied $0.25 [per hour] increase in 2015.
a. Glenn A. Mutter participated in approving resolutions for the annual budgets
from 2013 through 2015 at the Borough Council meetings on December 3,
2013, and December 2, 2014, which included expenditures for payroll
increases for all Borough employees.
b. The hourly increases approved for all employees [were] received by Leo
Mutter.
29. Leo Mutter's hourly rate of pay as Borough Manager from 2012 through 2015
reflects increases which Glenn A. Mutter participated in approving as follows:
Year
Hourly Rate
2012
$22.75
2013
$24.75
2014
$25.20
2015
$25.45
a. Leo Mutter's $2.00 per hour increase in compensation was a result of his son
(Respondent Glenn A. Mutter) voting to increase his (Leo Mutter's) rate of
compensation.
b. Hourly increases in 2014 and 2015 were the same for all employees.
30. The following checks were issued to Leo Mutter as compensation for his duties as
Borough Manager from Bally Borough for calendar year 2013 following Glenn A.
Mutters efforts to obtain the $2.00 per hour increase:
a. 2013:
o ! . -
Amount
• r
r:
'r r � r
�ilk�f►�iyK
KIM
r - •
r
r
r:•
r•r:
'r .r ••
r
r
r•
'r :•
• r
r•�
'r r - ••
r r
r•.:
r •�
f r
r • •
'r • :
90 *11
.,
• - r
r
E��i��f:�f►z.
r r
r
'r •
Mutter, 15 -033
aP ge 7
31
10/16/2013
10/30/2013
055
067
$1,953.05
$1,595.15
11/13/2013
11/27/2013
079
0
$1,905.49
,574.76
12/11/2013
Per hour
,9 2.2
12/24/2013
71$37.13 & 164.51$37.80
,772.42
As a Bally Borough Council Member from 2013 through 2015, Glenn A. Mutter
participated in approving the payment of bills at each Council meeting that included
the payroll for all Borough employees, including his father, Leo Mutter,
32. As part of Leo Mutter's compensation as Borough Manager, he was eligible to
receive compensation for overtime hours and dedicated snow plowing hours. Leo
Mutter's overtime /snow plowing hourly compensation for years 2013 through 2015
was as follows:
a. Leo Mutter was to receive double time overtime for working on holidays.
b. The compensation Leo Mutter received of $30.00 per hour for snow plowing
was first established by the Borough in or around 2000 and was not to
exceed ... $30.00 per hour, regardless of the overtime pay rate the Borough
employee was receiving.
33. Leo Mutter's W -2 Wage and Tax Statements from Bally Borough for 2013 reflected
the following compensation:
Year Compensation
12013 $60,152.68
a. Leo Mutter's compensation in 2013 (including overtime and snow plowing)
based on his hourly pay rate of $22.75 effective December 2012, would have
totaled $55,195.67 absent the $2.00 per hour pay increase initiated by Glenn
A. Mutter.
b. Leo Mutter received additional compensation in 2013 as a result of the pay
increases he received through motions approved by Borough Council,
including the recommendation and approval of Borough Council Member
Glenn A. Mutter for a total of $4,957.01.
34. In or around July 2015, it was determined that the insurance rates for the medical
insurance of Bally Borough employees were to increase substantially.
a. The insurance rates were to increase due in large part to Borough Manager
Leo Mutter's age.
35. At the Bally Borough Council Meeting on July 7, 2015, motions were made by
Borough Council to change the Borough's insurance plan and to increase the salary
of the Borough Manager, in order for the Borough Manager to pay for his own health
insurance plan.
2013 Hours 1 Pay Rate
2014 Hours 1 Pay Rate
2015 Hours/ Pay Rate
Category
Per Hour
Per hour
Per hour
Time and Half
1531$37.13
71$37.13 & 164.51$37.80
52.251$38.18
Double Time
36.51$49.50
6.51$49.50 & 241$50.40
41$50.90
Snow Plowing
39.51$30.00
31.51$30.00
9.51$30.00
a. Leo Mutter was to receive double time overtime for working on holidays.
b. The compensation Leo Mutter received of $30.00 per hour for snow plowing
was first established by the Borough in or around 2000 and was not to
exceed ... $30.00 per hour, regardless of the overtime pay rate the Borough
employee was receiving.
33. Leo Mutter's W -2 Wage and Tax Statements from Bally Borough for 2013 reflected
the following compensation:
Year Compensation
12013 $60,152.68
a. Leo Mutter's compensation in 2013 (including overtime and snow plowing)
based on his hourly pay rate of $22.75 effective December 2012, would have
totaled $55,195.67 absent the $2.00 per hour pay increase initiated by Glenn
A. Mutter.
b. Leo Mutter received additional compensation in 2013 as a result of the pay
increases he received through motions approved by Borough Council,
including the recommendation and approval of Borough Council Member
Glenn A. Mutter for a total of $4,957.01.
34. In or around July 2015, it was determined that the insurance rates for the medical
insurance of Bally Borough employees were to increase substantially.
a. The insurance rates were to increase due in large part to Borough Manager
Leo Mutter's age.
35. At the Bally Borough Council Meeting on July 7, 2015, motions were made by
Borough Council to change the Borough's insurance plan and to increase the salary
of the Borough Manager, in order for the Borough Manager to pay for his own health
insurance plan.
Mutter, 15 -033
a1agge78
a. A motion was made by Ed Agnoli, seconded b Michael Bauman to obtain
the Highmark insurance option with the $5001000 deductibles and vision
care and the PP3 -100 Delta Dental insurance. All Ayes with Glenn A. Mutter
abstaining.
A motion was made by Matt Gehman, seconded by Ed A noli to increase the
salary of the Borough Manager by the actual cost of- obtaining his own
comparable insurance to the Borough's new medical plan. The Borough
Manager agreed to obtain his own insurance due to the large cost of his and
his spouses participation in the Borough's insurance plan. All Ayes with
Glenn A. Mutter abstaining.
36. In July 2015, Bally Borough's annual costs for medical insurance would have
increased approximately $24,653.00 if Leo Mutter continued on the Borough's
insurance plan.
37. As a result of the motion that was made to increase Leo Mutter's compensation in
July 2015, his hourly rate increased $3.45 per hour resulting in a pay increase of
$7,176.00 for the year.
This was based on Leo Mutter's actual health insurance coverage for the
year totaling $7,181.00 for the year.
38. Glenn A. Mutter did not recommend or participate in any discussions or votes on
any matters related to the insurance coverage for Borough employees.
Glenn A. Mutter abstained on all matters related to the health insurance
coverage for Borough employees and any additional salary increases for his
father, Leo Mutter.
39. At the Ball Borough Council Meeting on December 1, 2015, Glenn A. Mutter
abstained from voting to approve Resolution 2015 -6 for the 2016 Bally Borough
budget due to a conflict of interest.
40. Glenn A. Mutter utilized the authority of his public position as a Borough Council
Member with Bally Borough by approving a $2.00 per hour salary increase for his
father and immediate family member, Leo Mutter, as the Borough Manager of Bally
Borough for the 2013 calendar year, totaling $4,957.01.
III. DISCUSSION:
As a Council Member for Bally Borough (`Borough" , Berks County, from
approximately January 2001 to the present, and as President o Borough Council since
June 7, 2011, Respondent Glen A. Mutter, hereinafter also referred to as "Respondent,"
"Respondent Mutter," and "Mutter," has been a public official subject to the provisions of
the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
The allegations are that Respondent Mutter violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(d), and
1105(b %5) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103(a), 1104(d), and 1105(b)(5): (1) when he
utilized t e authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefit of Leo Mutter,
Respondent's father and member of his immediate family, when he participated in
discussions and actions of the Borough Council, including but not limited to lobbying,
persuading, and attempting to influence other Members of Council to increase the
compensation of his father as a Borough Manager; (2) when he subsequently voted to
approve an annual budget for the 2013 and 2014 calendar years, which included an
increase in compensation for his father, resulting in a pecuniary benefit to his father; and
(3) when Respondent failed to disclose G.A. Mutter Exteriors as a source of income on
Mapes15 -033
9
Statements of Financial Interests ( "SFIs ") filed with the Borough for calendar years 2011,
2013, and 2014.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, the Investigative Division has exercised
its prosecutorial discretion to nol pros the allegations under Section 1105(b)(5)) of the
Ethics Act. Based upon the nol pros, we need not address the Section 1105(b)(5)
allegations no longer before us.
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 officelemployment or confidential information received by
holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public officiallpublic
employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a
member of his immediate family is associated.
Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act provides that no public official shall be allowed to
take the oath of office, or enter or continue upon his duties, nor shall he receive
compensation from public funds, unless he has filed an SFI as required by the Ethics Act.
As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of
Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this
Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein.
Respondent Mutter has served as a Member of Borough Council from approximately
January 2001 to the present. Respondent has served as President of Borough Council
since June 7, 2011. Borough Council consists of seven Members.
Mutter, 15 -033
X10
Respondent's father is named Leo Mutter. Leo Mutter has been employed as the
Borough Manager since 2010. In 2012 Leo Mutter's rate of compensation as Borough
Manager was $22.75 per hour, based upon a 40 -hour workweek.
On December 4, 2012, Borough Council held both an executive session meeting
and a public meeting. During the executive session meeting, Borough Council discussed
salaries /wages of Borough employees including Leo Mutter. Respondentwas present and
participated in both meetings. Respondent recommended to Borough Council that a salary
increase be given to Leo Mutter. Respondent opined that Leo Mutterworked excess hours
for the Borough, beyond forty (40) hours per week, and that he did not claim many of the
hours he actually worked for the Borough. Respondent sought the support of other
Borough Council Members for a salary increase for his father, based on the number of
hours Leo Mutter was believed to work for the Borough. At the Borough Council public
meeting on December 4, 2012, Respondent participated in approving a motion to grant
wagelsalary increases for Borough employees including Leo Mutter. A $2.00 per hour
raise was approved for Leo Mutter as Borough Manager. Leo Mutter was the only Borough
employee receiving a $2.00 per hour pay increase.
Leo Mutter's W -2 Wage and Tax Statements from the Borough for 2013 reflected
compensation totaling $60,152.68. Without the $2.00 per hour pay increase initiated by
Respondent, Leo Mutter's compensation in 2013 would have totaled $55,195.67.
The parties have stipulated that Respondent utilized the authority of his public
position as a Borough Council Member b approving a $2.00 per hour salary increase for
his father, Leo Mutter, as the Borough Manager for the 2013 calendar year, resulting in
additional compensation to Leo Mutter in 2013 totaling $4,957.01.
In December 2013 and December 2014, Respondent participated in approving
motions at Borough Council meetings to increase the compensation of all Borough
employees, which included a uniformly applied $0.45 per hour increase in 2014, and a
uniformly applied $0.25 per hour increase in 2015. Respondent participated in approving
resolutions for the annual budgets from 2013 through 2015 at the Borough Council
meetings on December 3, 2013, and December 2, 2014, which included expenditures for
payroll increases for all Borough employees. The hourly increases approved for all
employees were received by Leo Mutter.
From 2013 through 2015, in his capacity as a Borough Council Member,
Respondent participated at each Borough Council meeting in approving the payment of
bills that included the payroll for all Borough employees, including his father, Leo Mutter.
Respondent did not participate in Borough Council actions in 2015 to provide
another hourly rate increase to Leo Mutter so that Leo Mutter could obtain his own health
insurance plan, resulting in a cost savings to the Borough.
Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply
the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case.
The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations
as follows:
3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in
relation to the above allegations:
a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official
and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a)
occurred when Mutter utilized the authority of his office
to effectuate an increase in his father's compensation,
culminating with a vote on a motion at the December 4,
Mutter, 15 -033
X11
2012, Borough Council Meeting that approved a $2.00
per hour raise for his father, Leo Mutter, as Borough
Manager.
b. That no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 PPa.C.S. §1103(a)
occurred when Mutter participated in approving
resolutions for the annual budgets from 2013 through
2015 at Borough Council meetings, due to the fact that
the annual budgets included expenditures for payroll
increases for all Borough employees.
C. That the Investigative Division agrees to nolle ros the
allegations that Mutter violated Section 1105(pb)(5) of
1105(b)(5), when Mutter failed to disclose G.A. Mutter
xteriors as a source of income on Statements of
Financial Interests filed with Bally Borough for calendar
years 2011, 2013, and 2014.
4. Mutter agrees to make payment in the amount of $2,250.00 in
settlement of this matter.
a. Mutter agrees to make a payment of $1,750.00 payable
to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded
to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication
in this matter.
b. Mutter agrees to make a payment of $500.00
representing a portion of the costs incurred by the
Commission in the investigation and enforcement of this
matter, which shall be made payable to the
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within thirty (30)
days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter.
5. Mutter agrees to file complete and accurate Statements of
Financial Interests with Bally Borough Council through the
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for 2011, 2013 and
2014 calendar years within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
the final adjudication in this matter.
6. Mutter agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation
or other payment from Bally Borough Council representing a
full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement
of this matter.
7. The Investigative Division will recommend that the State Ethics
Commission take no further action in this matter, and make no
specific recommendations to an law enforcement or other
authority to take action in this mater. Such, however, does not
prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate
enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's failure to
comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or
cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to
review this matter further.
Mutter 15 -033
Page l2
Consent Agreement, at 1 -2
In considering the Consent Agreement, we agree with the parties that a violation of
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(x), occurred when Respondent
Mutter utilized the authority of his office to effectuate an increase in his father's
compensation, culminating with a vote on a motion at the December 4, 2012, Borough
Council Meeting that approved a $2.00 per hour raise for his father, Leo Mutter, as
Borough Manager.
Respondent used the authority of his public office as a Borough Council Member
when, on December 4, 2012, he participated in both an executive session meeting and a
public meeting of Borough Council regarding salaries /wages of Borough employees
Enclud�ng Leo Mutter. Respondent recommended to Borough Council that a salary
increase be given to Leo Mutter. Respondent opined that Leo Mutter worked excess hours
for the Borough, beyond forty (40) hours per week, and that he did not claim many of the
hours he actually worked for the Borough. Respondent sought the support of other
Borough Council Members for a salary increase for his father, based on the number of
hours Leo Mutter was believed to work for the Borough. At the Borough Council public
meeting on December 4, 2012, Respondent participated in approving a motion to grant
wage /salary increases for Borough employees including Leo Mutter. A $2.00 per hour
raise was approved for Leo Mutter as Borough Manager. Leo Mutter was the only Borough
employee receiving a $2.00 per hour pay increase. The parties have stipulated that
Respondent utilized the authority of his public position as a Borough Council Member by
approving a $2.00 per hour salary increase for his father, Leo Mutter, as the Borough
Nanager for the 2013 calendar year, resulting in additional compensation to Leo Mutter in
2013 totaling $4,957.01.
With each element of a violation of Section 1103(a ) established, we hold that a
violation of Section 1103(x) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when
Respondent Mutter utilized the authority of his office to effectuate an increase in his
father's compensation, culminating with a vote on a motion at the December 4, 2012,
Borough Council Meeting that approved a $2.00 per hour raise for his father, Leo Mutter,
as Borough Manager.
We further agree with the parties that no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics
Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Respondent Mutter participated in approving
resolutions for the annual budgets from 2013 through 2015 at Borough Council meetings.
This conclusion is based upon the Stipulated Findings that the annual budgets for 2014
and 2015 included expenditures for uniformly applied payroll increases for all Borough
employees, such that the class /subclass exclusion to the definition of "conflict" or "conflict
of interest," 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, would be applicable.
Accordingly, we hold that, based upon the Stipulated Findings, no violation of
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103 {a), occurred when Respondent
Mutter participated in approving resolutions for the Borough annual budgets from 2013
through 2015 at Borough Council meetings.
It appears that the Investigative Division has exercised its prosecutorial discretion to
non pros the allegation under Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act.
As part of the Consent Agreement, Respondent Mutter has agreed to make
payment in the total amount of $2,250.00 in settlement of this matter as follows. Mutter
has agreed to make payment in the amount of $1,750.00 payable to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
the final adjudication in this matter. Mutter has agreed to make payment of $500.00
payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, representing a portion of the costs
incurred by the Commission in the investigation and enforcement of this matter, with such
payment to be forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the
Mutter 15033
Page^ 3
final adjudication in this matter. Mutter has further agreed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough Council representing
full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. Finally, Muter
has agreed to file complete and accurate SFIs for calendar years 2011, 2013, and 2014
with the Borough Council, through this Commission, within thirty (30) days of the issuance
of the final adjudication in this matter. We agree that the aforesaid recommendations are
appropriate, including the recommendation that Mutter file complete and accurate SFIs for
calendar ears 201'f, 2013, and 2014, notwithstanding the nol pros as to the Section
1105(b)(5� allegation.
Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent Mutter is
directed to make payment in the amount of $1,750.00 payable to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30th) day
after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent Mutter is directed to make
payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission,
representing a portion of the costs incurred by the Commission in the investigation and
enforcement of this matter, with such payment forwarded to this Commission by no later
than the thirtieth (30th) day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order.
We take administrative notice that Respondent has submitted checks for the
aforesaid payments.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent Mutter is directed to not
accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough Council
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
To the extent he has not already done so, Respondent Mutter is directed to file
complete and accurate SFIs for the 2011, 2013, and 2014 calendar years with the Borough
Council, through this Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30t) day after the mailing
date of this adjudication and Order.
Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further
action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order
enforcement action.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. As a Council Member for Bally Borough ( "Borough "), Berks County, from
approximately January 2001 to the present, and as President of Borough Council
since June 7, 2011, Respondent Glen A. Mutter ( "Mutter ") has been a public official
subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics
Act ), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et sue.
2. Mutter violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when he
utilized the authority of his office to effectuate an increase in his father's
compensation, culminating with a vote on a motion at the December 4, 2012,
Borough Council Meeting that approved a $2.00 per hour raise for his father, Leo
Mutter, as Borough Manager.
3. Based upon the Stipulated Findings, no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics
Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Mutter participated in approving
resolutions for the Borough annual budgets from 2013 through 2015 at Borough
Council meetings.
In Re: Glen A. Mutter, File Docket: 15 -033
Respondent Date Decided: 617117
Date Mailed: 6122117
ORDER NO. 1714
1. As a Council Member for Bally Borough ( "Borough "), Berks County, Glen A. Mutter
/NR 9,.. t___M - .. _ 1 _i_ _I r1_ _i__._ Ad nn /_\ LI_ _ r ..1_ 1'_ /1 __� J r_____1 I - _ r.l - _ A _i
effectuate an increase in his father's compensation, culminating with a vote on a
motion at the December 4, 2012, Borough Council Meeting that approved a $2.00
per hour raise for his father, Leo Mutter, as Borough Manager.
2. Based upon the Stipulated Findings, no violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics
Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Mutter participated in approving
resolutions for the Borough annual budgets from 2013 through 2015 at Borough
Council meetings.
3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Mutter is directed to make payment in
the amount of $1,750.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and
forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth
(30th) day after the mailing date of this Order.
We take administrative notice that Respondent has submitted a check for the
aforesaid payment.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Mutter is directed to make payment in
the amount of $500.00 payable to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission,
representing a portion of the costs incurred by the Commission in the investigation
and enforcement of this matter, with such payment forwarded to this Commission by
no later than the thirtieth (30th) day after the mailing date of this Order.
a. We take administrative notice that Respondent has submitted a check for the
aforesaid payment.
5. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Mutter is directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough Council
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this
matter.
6. To the extent he has not already done so, Mutter is directed to file complete and
accurate Statements of Financial Interests for the 2011, 2013, and 2014 calendar
years with the Borough Council, through this Commission, by no later than the
thirtieth (30th) day after the mailing date of this Order.
7. Compliance with paragraphs 3, 4, 5, and 6 of this Order 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.
i
, - wv�o 5