HomeMy WebLinkAbout1726 SocksPHONE: 717 - 783 -1610
TOLL FREE: 1 -800- 932 -0936
In Re: Peter L. Socks, Jr.,
Respondent
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
FINANCE BUILDING
613 NORTH STREET, ROOM 309
HARRISBURG, PA 17120 -0400
File Docket:
X -ref:
Date Decided
Date Mailed:
FACSIMILE: 717- 787 -0806
WEBSITE: www.ethics.Pa.goY
15 -019
Order No. 1726
11/28/17
1215117
Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair
Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair
Roger Nick
Marla Feeley
Melanie DePalma
Monique Myatt Galloway
Michael A. Schwartz
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 sect., by the above -named Respondent. At the
commencement of its investigation, the lnnvestigative Division served upon Respondent
written notice of the specific allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the
Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as
an "Investigative Complaint." 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.
ALLEGATIONS:
That Peter Socks, a public official /public employee in his capacity as a Supervisor
for Berwick Township, Adams County, Pennsylvania, violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a),
1104(d), 1105((b)(1), 1105(b)(8), 1105(b)(9), and 1105(b)(10) of the State Ethics Act (Act
93 of 1998 �enepltl , 65 F�a.C.S. §§ 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), 1105(b)(1), 1105(b)(8), 1105(b)(9),
and 1105 )(1 when he utilized the authority of his public position for the private
pecuniary of himself when he directed and /or otherwise authorized the payment of
His personal cellular telephone bill, at the expense of the Township, when same was not
approved by the Township Supervisors and /or the Township Auditors; when he utilized the
authority of his office to influence the Township Board of Supervisors to continue payments
of his private cellular telephone, resulting in continued private pecuniary benefit; and when
he failed to disclose any office, directorship or employment of any nature whatsoever in
any business entity, any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit,
and /or the identity of any financial interest in a business which in the preceding calendar
year had been transferred to a member of the re orting person`s immediate family, for
Statements of Financial Interests filed for the 2011 and 2012 calendar years; when he
failed to include an address on his 2011 calendar year statement of financial interests; and
when he failed to disclose his public position /governmental entity and calendar year on a
purported 2013 calendar year statement of financial interests filing.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 1
il. FINDINGS:
1. Peter Socks ( "Socks ") has served as a Berwick Township Supervisor since January
4, 2010.
a. Socks has served as the Chairman of the Township Board of Supervisors
( "Board of Supervisors ") since January 4, 2016.
b. Socks previously served as the Vice Chairman of the Board of Supervisors
from January 6, 2014, through January 3, 2016.
2. Socks was initially appointed* as the Office Manager by the Board of Supervisors at
the Reorganizational meeting of January 6, 2014.
a. Socks was reappointed as the Office Manager by the Board of Supervisors
at the Reorganizational meetings of January 5, 2015, and January 4, 2016.
b. Socks was informally designated the Office Manager in January 2011,
January 2012, and January 2013.
1. Socks was never officially approved by a vote of the Board of
Supervisors as Office Manager for the period of 2011 through 2013.
*[Cf., Fact Finding 12.]
3. Berwick Township (hereafter "Township") Adams County, Pennsylvania is a
Township of the Second Class (population less than 5,000) governed by a five (5)
Member Board of Supervisors.
a. As per the Second -Class Township Code, Township Supervisors receive
$1,875.00 gross annually, paid in quarterly installments, for services
rendered in their elected Supervisor /public official capacity.
1. The Supervisors need not be present at every Township meeting to
receive Supervisor compensation.
b. In accordance with the Second -Class Township Code, any Supervisor that is
employed with the Township must have a working Supervisor wage
established by the Township Board of Auditors.
1. The Township position of Office Manager is a position which is
available to any of the five (5) Township Supervisors.
2. The Township position of Office Manager does not have an official job
description maintained at the Township office.
3. The Town s h' position of Office Manager is not a compensated
position and, herefore, does not require any action by the Township
Board of Auditors to set a working Supervisor wage for any Township
Supervisor appointed as the Office Manager.
4. The Township holds one regularly scheduled legislative meeting per month.
a. The first Township meeting of each calendar year is the Township
Reorganizational meeting.
1. At the Reorgganizational meeting, Township public officials are
appointed an for reappointed in their respective officer positions.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
b. The Township holds special meetings as necessary.
C. The Township holds a separate budget meeting each year.
1. The Township budget meeting takes place in either October or
November of each year.
2. The purpose of the budget meeting is to discuss the proposed
Township budget for the following fiscal /calendar year.
aa. The proposed budget includes information pertaining to
"normal" and "expected" Township expenses throughout each
calendar year.
5. Prior to meetings, Supervisors receive a meeting packet that generally consists of
the upcoming meeting agenda, a written copy of the prior month's meeting minutes,
and a listing of all bills received by the Township since the prior meeting which have
not yet been paid.
a. The meeting agendas are prepared by the Township Secretary.
b. Recurring bills (e.g. utility bills) are paid prior to the monthly meetings.
1. Recurring bills are those considered to be "routine" and occur on a
scheduled basis with a scheduled payment due date.
2. One of the recurring bills is itemized as the "Office Manager Cell
Phone."
6. Berwick Township passed Resolution #14 -032 on July 14, 2014, authorizing
payment of certain bills that may become due and payable prior to the Board of
Supervisors' official review and approval.
a. Resolution #14 -032 was signed by both Chairman Supervisor Robert Foltz,
Jr., and Secretary Hawbaker and was initialed by Supervisors Vincent
Cockley, Socks, and Thomas Danner.
1. The only Supervisor that did not initial this resolution was Earle Black,
J r.
b. The recurring bill list attached to Resolution #14032 consisted of a list of 17
specific bills that were identified as needing to be paid between Township
meetings because of their payment due dates.
1. The 15th bill on this list is the "Office Manager's Cell Phone."
7. The vote taken at each legislative meeting to approve the bills includes any after -
the -fact approval of checks issued prior to the date of meeting.
a. The register of bills maintained by the Township in the Township minute
books document all bills approved for payment at each meeting.
8. Voting during a Township meeting occurs in group "aye /nay" fashion after a motion
is made and properly seconded.
a. Any abstentions or objections made during the vote are specifically noted in
the minutes.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
ague -
b. Minutes of each meeting are approved for accuracy at the subsequent
meeting.
9. Signature authority over Township accounts is maintained by all five (5) Supervisors.
a. Issued Township checks require the signature of any two (2) of the five (5)
Supervisors.
b. Signatures on Township checks must be live signatures; facsimile stamps
are not used.
10. Since January 2011, the Board of Supervisors has consisted of the following
individuals (other than Socks):
a. Robert A. Foltz, Jr. ( "Foltz ").
1. Foltz is in his third term as a Supervisor.
2. Foltz began his service as a Township Supervisor in January 2000.
3. Foltz had been serving as the Board Chairman until January 4, 2016,
when Socks was appointed as Board Chairman.
4. Foltz is the appointed Road Master for the Township.
b. Earle J. Black, Jr. ( "Black ")
1. Black is in his third term as a Supervisor.
2. Black began his service as a Township Supervisor in 2001.
C. Vincent B. Cockley ( "Cockley ").
1. Cockley has served as a Supervisor since January 3, 2012.
2. Cockley replaced a previous Supervisor, Alan Carey, whose term
expired at the end of 2011.
d. Thomas M. Danner ( "Danner ").
1. Danner has served as a Supervisor since January 6, 2014.
2. Danner replaced a previous Supervisor, Fred Nugent, whose term
expired at the end of 2013.
e. Fred W. Nugent, Jr. ( "Nugent ").
1. Nugent served as a Supervisor through December 2013 and was
Board Vice Chairman prior to the conclusion of his term.
THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION PERTAINS TO THE ALLEGATION REGARDING THE
CELLULAR TELEPHONE PAYMENTS FROM THE TOWNSHIP TO PETER L. SOCKS,
J R.
11. The position of Office Manager is not specifically enumerated within the Second -
Class Township Code.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 8—
a. The Township position of Office Manager is not equivalent to the position of
Township Manager.
b. The position of Office Manager was also not included in the Township's
index of resolutions for calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2015.
Resolution #14 -030 states the appointment of Socks as the Township
Office Manager.
12. During the executive session of the December 27, 2010, Township meeting, the
Board of Supervisors appointed* Socks as the Office Manager.
a. Present at the meeting were Supervisors Foltz, Nugent, Black, and Socks.
Supervisor Carey was absent from the December 27, 2010, Township
meeting.
b. The previous Office Manager was Supervisor Black.
G. The decision to appoint* Socks as the Office Manager stemmed from the
Board's decision to remove Black as the Office Manager.
1. The decision to remove Black as the Office Manager stemmed from
the Board of Supervisors' disapproval of Black's performance as the
Office Manager.
2. At the time of Black's removal from the Office Manager position, he
had not been receiving payments from the Township for his cellular
telephone bill_
d. There was no recorded vote in the meeting minutes of the Board of
Supervisors' decision to appoint` Socks as the Office Manager.
e. There was no recorded vote in the meeting minutes of the Board of
Supervisors' decision to remove Black as the Office Manager.
There is no recorded vote in the meeting minutes of the December 27, 2010,
executive session to authorize payments from the Township to Socks for his
personal cellular telephone in conjunction with his newly appointed duties as
the Office Manager.
*[Cf., Fact Finding 2.]
13. Socks entered into a customer contract with AT &T for personal cellular telephone
service on January 4, 2011.
a. The Township was not listed in any manner in Socks' customer contract with
AT &T.
b. Socks initiated this customer contract at the AT &T store located at 101
Wilson Avenue, Suite A, Hanover, PA 17331.
C. Socks' first customer contract with AT &T included the following items and
features;
1. Blackberry RIM 9800 cellular telephone.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
aa. The telephone number assigned to Socks with this cellular
telephone was 717 -xxx -xxxx.
2,
A 24 -month term of service.
3.
450 anytime /daytime minutes.
4.
5,000 night/weekend minutes.
5.
2 gigabytes of data per month.
6.
An initial bill totaling $140.29.
14. Socks began to receive payments from the Township for the 717 -xxx -xxxx
telephone bill on January 10, 2011.
a. The ayments came in the form of checks from the Township's General
Fund account.
b. The Township's General Fund account, ending in [number redacted], is
maintained by People's Bank.
1. As a Supervisor, Socks has maintained signature authority for the
Township's General Fund account from August 1, 2010, to present.
15. The "Office Manager Cell Phone" is included in the register of bills.
a. Socks routinely provided a monthly cellular telephone bill to the Township
Secretary/Treasurer seeking payment/reimbursement.
1. Prior to the August 10, 2015, Township meeting, no policy had existed
regarding the Township's process to pay Socks' monthly cellular
telephone bill.
16. On June 25, 2012, changes were made to Socks' AT &T customer plan and a new
customer contract was initiated by Socks with AT &T which increased the monthly
fees.
a. Socks maintained the same telephone number: 717 -xxx -xxxx.
b. The following changes were made to Socks' AT &T customer plan:
1. HTECH CORP PH39100 cellular telephone
2. 3 gigabytes of data per month.
3. An initial bill totaling $170.81.
C. Sacks' AT &T customer plan continued to include the following features:
1. A 24 -month term of service.
2. 450 anytime /daytime minutes.
3. 5,000 night/weekend minutes.
17. At the May 28, 2013, Township meeting, then-Supervisor Nugent motioned to
discontinue payments from the Township to Socks for Socks' cellular telephone.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
age
a. Black seconded the motion.
b. Both the motion and the second were withdrawn after Socks had informed
the Board of Supervisors that his cellular telephone was in mid - contract at
that time.
Socks had informed the Board of Supervisors that if his cellular
telephone plan was cancelled in mid -- contract, Socks would be faced
with additional surcharges from AT &T.
2. There is no record of the Township authorizing Socks to enter into a
contract or to otherwise receive payment for a cellular telephone.
18. On January 10, 2014, changes were again made by Socks to the AT &T customer
plan and a new customer contract was initiated by Socks with AT &T.
a. Socks maintained the same telephone number, 717- xxx- -xxxx.
b. The following changes were made to Socks' AT &T customer plan:
1. Samsung SM -N900A cellular telephone.
aa. The total cost of this cellular telephone was $724.99.
bb. The cost of this cellular telephone was divided into twenty -six
(26) monthly payments.
2. Unlimited talk and text.
3. An initial bill totaling $156.56.
C. Socks' AT &T customer plan continued to include a twenty -four (24) month
term of service.
d. Socks entered into the new contract with AT &T on January 10, 2014, after
the Board of Supervisors attempted to take action to cease payments for his
phone.
e. Socks did not seek authorization or approval from the Board of Supervisors
to renew his contract and/or to continue to receive compensation /payment
for same prior to January 10, 2014.
19. At the August 10, 2015, Township meeting, there was a discussion regarding Socks'
cellular telephone.
a. Supervisor Danner read a statement regarding the Township's action to
retroactively approve the payments from the Township for Socks' cellular
telephone.
1. "Even though it has been the long standing policy of the Township to
provide the Office Manager with a cell phone at the Township's
expense, in order to memorialize what was previously authorized, I
make a motion authorizing payment of the Office Manager's monthly
cell phone bill retroactive to January 2011, when the current Office
Manager, Pete Socks assumed the position. This motion is based
upon the following facts:
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
1) There was discussion held in executive session in December 2010
regarding then Office Manager Earle Black and concerns with his
management styles with employees. As a result of that executive
session, Mr. Black stepped down as Office Manager and Mr. Socks
was designated as Office Manager. Also at that time, a discussion
was held regarding Mr. Socks getting a cell phone to be paid for by
the township so office business could be conducted more efficiently in
accordance with the long - standing township policy. The Board
directed Mr. Socks to proceed with the purchase of a cell phone and
to submit the cell phones bills for approval each month.
2) It has been a long - standing policy of Berwick Township that cell
p ones used in the capacity to conduct any township business are
paid for by the township. This pre -dates the cell phone Mr. Socks
uses and includes those used by Supervisors Bob Coleman in his
capacity as Office Manager, Supervisor Alan Carer in his capacity as
Office Manager, Supervisor Bob Foltz in his capacity as Road Master,
Bob Frock, Brian Ernst and Marvin Hughes in their position as road
crew. Mr. Black was offered a cell phone when he assumed the Office
Manager duties, but refused it, instead choosing to receive health
insurance coverage provided and paid for by the township.
3) Mr. Socks has submitted bills to be paid since January 2011 after
the Board agreed to and requested he purchase a cell phone as
noted in #1 above. Each of these bills were included on the monthly
bill list and voted upon monthly by the Board. This has occurred 55
times with each of these bills being approved for payment without
objection from any of the Board members.
4) In May 2013 Supervisor Nugent made a motion, seconded by Mr.
Black to discontinue paying for the Office Manager's cell phone bill'.
This in effect, proves knowledge that the bill was being paid and
agreed to. The motion was rescinded after finding out Mr. Socks was
in mid- contract.
5) The yearly auditor's reports since 2011 have had no discrepancies
with both the billing and the payments of the Office Manager's cell
phone bills. Also, each year the auditors pursue information from the
Supervisors requesting any possible or knowingly suspicious activity
in he operations of the ownship. No reported issues were ever
raised regarding the Office Manager's phone billing and usage.
6) Whereas all budgets since 2011 were proposed and passed with
the inclusion of the Office Manager's cell phone as a Township
expense, voted on and passed without objections until the discussion
as noted in item #4."
b. Supervisor Danner's motion was seconded by Supervisor Cockley to
retroactively approve Sacks' cell phone payments dating back to January
2011.
The motion was passed by a 3 -1 vote.
aa. Supervisors Danner, Cockley, and Foltz voted aye; Supervisor
Black voted nay; Socks abstained.
bb. At no point was personal use of the Office Manager cellular
telephone discussed and/or authorized.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
2. After the vote, Socks stated that anyone serving as Office Manager
should have a cellular telephone in order to more efficiently conduct
business.
C. Socks discussed the pending motion prior to its introduction, and provided
pre - meeting information to Supervisor Danner in preparation for the motion.
20. The Board of Supervisors' actions and Danner's statement occurred after the
initiation of the State Ethics Commission's preliminaryry inquiry and after Danner,
Cockley, and Foltz were interviewed by a State Ethics Commission investigator and
made aware of the allegations against Socks.
21. The proposed budget for calendar year 2015 was the first budget which included a
projected expense amount for the `Office Manager Cell Phone."
a. This expense was also included in the proposed budget for calendar year
2016.
b. "Office Manager Cell Phone" was not included in the proposed budgets for
calendar years 2011, 2012, 2013, or 2014.
22, On August 17, 2015, changes were made to Socks' AT &T customer plan and a new
customer contract was initiated by Socks with AT &T.
a. Socks maintained the same telephone number: 717- xxx -xxxx.
b. The following changes were made to Socks' AT &T customer plan:
Addition of a second cellular telephone.
aa. The added second cellular telephone was a Samsung SM-
T707A.
bb. The telephone number for the added second cellular telephone
is 717- yyy-yyyy.
2. 5 gigabytes of data shared between the two cellular telephones.
3. An initial bill totaling $158.50.
G. Socks' AT &T customer plan continued to include the following features:
A twenty -four (24) month term of service.
2. Unlimited talk and text.
23. From January 10, 2011, to August 10, 2015, Socks has attended fifty -three (53) out
of fifty -six (56) Township Board of Supervisors meetings.
a. Socks was absent from the Township meetings held on the following dates:
July 11, 2011; July 9, 2012; July 8, 2013.
b. At each of the fifty -three (53) Township meetings attended by Socks during
that timeframe, Socks voted to approve the monthly bill list.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page ' 30
The monthly bill list for each of those fifty -three (53) months included
the bills paid by the Township for the cost of Socks' cellular
telephone.
24. From January 10, 2011, to July 29, 2015, Socks received a total of $5,767.41 from
the Township as payment for costs associated with his personal cellular telephone.
a. listed below is a chart detailing each check that was issued to Socks
between January 10, 2011, and July 29, 2015, for the payment of Socks'
monthly cellular telephone expenses.
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
02
0
8. 7
66
4
94.7
63
2
0.77
12
--2T3
-$T3-5- .f0
389
2 2
9
6
12/17112
00.77
2
2 4
$3j.-94---T4-T2----T2/12
2094
3 4
.98
692
4
9
-fT5-T--
24
99.5
4
2
92.09
729
2
.74
63
-371-4M-
7 ,90
55
3 2
92.
75
3
99.74
2
4
73.8
48
4 9
AO
788
8
99.
28
23
73.
5
2
92.00
8
--5-F2 3
.35
248
6 3
7 .8
24
6 2
92.0
8
6 M--fl-00
35
27
7 1
73.76
54
7
.99
856
7115/13
100.
9
7
80.
5
2
00.57
884
8 2
0.33
1317
9 2
7 .34
1581
9 2 2
0. 7
8
3
00.33
34
9
80.60
60
0 2
0.77
945
Total
1,056.72
Total
1,151.76
Total
1,198.64
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
69
3
00.
22
4
9.85
2006
2 3
.38
07
9 4
99. 5
20
3 4
64.3
2334
5
.97
060
24 4
99.
2
2 5
99.97
2094
3 4
2. 4
NIA
30 Tf 5
99. 9 7
2
4/25/14
2. 5
4 5
0.02
22
5 3
2. 5
2451
5 815
00.3
2 6
6 4
2. 5
476
6 9 5
0 2
2
4 4
12.7
250
2
7 5
0.32
3
-8T2-2-/ 4
T2- 24. 2
2224
9 4
0.22
225
3 4
99.85
Total
1,459.70
Total
900.59
b. From January 10, 2011, to July 29, 2015, Socks received a total of $5,767.41
from the Township as payment for his private /personal cellular telephone.
25. Socks has continued to receive payments from the Township for his cellular
telephone, following Supervisor Danner's retroactive motion at the August 10, 2015,
Township meeting.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page!
a. Listed below is a chart detailin the payments totaling $680.21 issued to
Socks between August 20, 201, and March 14, 2016, for the payment of
Socks' monthly cellular telephone expenses.
Check
Nos.
Check
Date
Amount
2532
8120/16
00.
255
9 4 5
9 5
2566
1 o 7 T22T1-5—
.85
6 3
11/18/15
$99.85
2636
2 2 5
99.85
2644
5 1. 7
2676
6
.4
704
4 6
$64.41
Total
680.21
b. From January 10, 2011, to March 14, 2016, Socks received an overall total
of $6,447.62 from the Township as payment for his cellular telephone.
26. From January 10, 2011, to June 23, 2014, the checks issued to Socks for the
payment of his cellular telephone bills included his name as the payee.
a. Socks' name was written on the memorandum line on the checks.
1. The following variants of Socks' name were on the specified checks:
aa. "Pete's Phone"
bb. "P. Socks"
cc. "P. Socks Cell Phone"
dd. "P. Socks Office Manager Cell Phone Bill"
2. The following chart provides the check numbers associated with
checks on which Socks' name had been written in the memorandum
line:
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
27. Between January 2011 and October 2015, Socks has used email correspondence
to direct payment [for] his personal cellular telephone.
a. Socks has emailed former Township Secretaries Janny Graham and Karen
Eakin and current Township Secretary Jean Hawbaker.
b. Said email correspondence was sent to /from Socks' personal Google email
account.
C. ... [E]mail correspondence [was] sent to and from Socks' personal Google
email account regarding Township payment of Socks' personal cellular
telephone bills.
28. From January 2011 through present, Socks' monthly cellular telephone invoice from
AT &T has been mailed directly to his residence.
a. The AT &T account for the Office Manager Cell Phone is in Socks' name.
b. The account for the cellular telephone utilized by Township Supervisor and
Road Master Foltz is in the Township's name.
1. The cellular telephones utilized by the Township road crew personnel
are also under this same account in the Township's name.
2. The monthly cellular telephone invoice for the telephones utilized by
Road Master Foltz and the Township road crew personnel is directly
mailed to, and paid by, the Township.
29. Socks utilized his cellular telephone for both personal and Township - related
purposes during the time period of January 4, 2011, through October 26, 2015.
a. Between January 4, 2011, and October 26, 2015, Socks made 687 personal
telephone calls on his cellular telephone totaling 16 hours 48 minutes and 49
seconds of personal usage.
b. Between January 4, 2011, and October 26, 2015, Socks engaged in 6,304
personal text messages on his cellular telephone.
1. These text messages associated with these telephone numbers have
no affiliation with the Township or Township- related business.
30. Socks used the authority of his public position to realize a private pecuniary benefit
when Socks participated in the discussion which resulted in the Supervisors' vote to
withdraw the motion to cancel Sock's partly Township-reimbursed cellular plan.
a. The cellular telephone account was in Socks' name and he would be
responsible for any termination fees.
b. The Board of Supervisors continued the reimbursement based on Socks'
statements.
31. Socks received compensation for the cost of his cellular telephone plan totaling
$5,767.41.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 3
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS PERTAIN TO DEFICIENT STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL
INTERESTS FILED BY SOCKS.
32. As a public official in his capacity as a Township Supervisor, Socks is required to file
a Statement of Financial Interests ( "SFI ") on an annual basis in accordance with the
Ethics Act.
a. Socks is required to file an SFI on or before May 15i of each year for the
previous calendar year.
b. Socks is required to ensure the completeness and accuracy of any SFI he
has filed with his governmental entity, the Township.
33. On June 24, 2015, Township Secretary Jean Hawbaker provided all SFIs filed by
Socks for calendar years 2010 through 2014 to an investigator for the Pennsylvania
State Ethics Commission pursuant to an SFI compliance review.
a. SFIs provided by Hawbaker for Socks were for the 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013,
and 2014 calendar years.
34. Socks filed deficient SFIs for calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.
a. Socks' SFI for calendar year 2011 included deficient and/or missing
information for Block Nos. 2, 13, 14, and 15.
1. Block 2 requires the filer's address (either work or home) and
telephone number.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2011.
2. Block 13 requires information pertaining to any office, directorship, or
employment in any business entity.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2011.
3. Block 14 requires information pertaining to any financial interest in
any legal entity in business for profit.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2011.
4. Block 15 requires information pertaining to any business interests
transferred to any immediate family member(s).
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2011.
C. Socks' SFI for calendar year 2012 included deficient and /or missing
information for Block Nos. 13, 14, and 15.
1. Block 13 requires information pertaining to any office, directorship, or
employment in any business entity.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2012.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
age..
Block 14 requires information pertaining to any financial interest in
any legal entity in business for profit.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2012.
Block 15 requires information pertaining to any business interests
transferred to any immediate family member(s).
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2012.
Socks' SFI for calendar year 2013 included deficient and/or missing
information for Block Nos. 5 and 7.
Block 5 requires information pertaining to the filer's governmental
entity in which he/she is /was an official, employee, candidate, or
nominee.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2013.
2. Block 7 requires the calendar year for which the SFI is being filed.
aa. Socks did not complete this segment of the SFI he had filed for
calendar year 2013.
III. DISCUSSION:
As a Supervisor for Berwick Township ( "Township "), Adams County, Pennsylvania,
since January 4, 2010, Respondent Peter L. Socks, Jr., also referred to herein as
"Respondent,' "Respondent Socks," and "Socks," 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 sere .
The allegations are that Socks violated Sections 1103(a) 1104(a�);, 1104(d),
1105(b)(1), 1105(b)(8), 1105 b)(9), and 1105(b)(10) of the Ethics Act, 65 I'a.C.S. §§
1103a, 1104(a), 1104(d), 11 5(b)(1), 1105(b)(8), 1105(b)(9), and 1105(b)(10): (1) when
he utilized the authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefitt of himself
when he directed and/or otherwise authorized the payment of his personal cellular
telephone bill, at the expense of the Township, when same was not approved by the
Township Supervisors and/or the Township Auditors; (2) when he utilized the authorit of
his office to influence the Township Board of Supervisors ( "Board of Supervisors" to
continue payments of his private cellular telephone, resulting in continued private pecuniary
benefit; (3) when he failed to disclose any office, directorship or employment of any nature
whatsoever in any business entity, any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in
business for profit, and /or the identity of any financial interest in a business which in the
preceding calendar year had been transferred to a member of the reporting person's
immediate family, for Statements of Financial Interests ( "SFIs ") filed forthe 2011 and 2012
calendar years; (4) when he failed to include an address on his 2011 calendar year SFI;
and (5) when he failed to disclose his public position /governmental entity and calendar year
on a purported 2013 calendar year SFI filing.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, the Investigative Division has exercised
its prosecutorial discretion to nol pros a portion of the allegations, including the allegations
under Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act. Based upon the nol pros, we need not address
the Section 1104(d) alllegations no longer before us.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 115
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 employyee 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.
Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides that each public officiallpublic employee
must file a Statement of Financial Interests far the preceding calendar year, each year that
he holds the position and the year after he leaves it.
Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act and its subsections detail the financial disclosure
that a person required to file the SFI form must provide.
Section 1105 (b)(1) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI his
name, address, and pubblic position.
Section 1105(b)(8) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any
office, directorship or employment in any business entity.
Section 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFl any
financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit.
Section 1105(b)(10) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SF1 any
financial interest in a business with which he is or has been associated in the preceding
calendar year which has been transferred to a member of his immediate family.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page
The term financial interest is defined in the Ethics Act as [a]ny financial interest in
a legal entity engaged in business for profit which comprises more than 5% of the equity of
the business or more than 5% of the assets of the economic interest in indebtedness." 65
Pa.C.S. § 1102.
As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of
Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this
Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein.
The Board of Supervisors consists of five Members. Respondent Socks has served
as a Township Supervisor since January 4, 2010, and as Chairman of the Board of
Supervisors since January 4, 2016. Respondent served as Vice Chairman of the Board of
Supervisors from January 6, 2014, through January 3, 2016.
In addition to serving as a Township Supervisor, commencing in January 2011,
Respondent held the uncompensated position of Township "Office Manager." The Board
of Supervisors initially designated Respondent as the Office Manager during an executive
session held December 27, 2010. The designation occurred without an official vote.
Respondent continued to serve in the position of Office Manager through 2013 without any
official vote of the Board of Supervisors. Respondent was formally appointed /reappointed
as the Township Office Manager at Reorganizational meetings of the Board of Supervisors
held January 6, 2014, January 5, 2015, and January 4, 2016.
On January 4, 2011, Respondent entered into a customer contract with AT &T for
personal cellular telephone service. The Township was not listed in the contract. There is
no record of the Township authorizing Respondent to enter into a contract or to otherwise
receive payment for a cellular telephone.
On June 25, 2012, January 10, 2014, and August 17, 2015, Respondent made
changes to his AT &T customer plan and initiated new contracts.
Commencing January 10, 2011, Respondent received payments from the Township
for the telephone bill for his personal cellular telephone service. Respondent routinely
provided a monthly cellular telephone bill to the Township SecretarylTreasurer seeking
payment/reimbursement.
At the May 28, 2013, Township meeting, then - Supervisor Fred W. Nugent, Jr.
motioned to discontinue payments from the Township to Respondent for Respondent's
cellular telephone. Supervisor Earle J. Black Jr. seconded the motion. Both the motion
and the second were withdrawn after Respondent informed the Board of Supervisors that
his cellular telephone was mid - contract and that if his cellular telephone plan was cancelled
mid - contract, Respondent would be faced with additional surcharges from AT &T. The
parties have stipulated that Respondent used the authority of his public position to realize a
private pecuniary benefit when he participated in the discussion which resulted in the
Supervisors' withdrawal of the motion to discontinue payments from the Township to
Respondent for Respondent's cellular telephone. The Board of Supervisors continued the
reimbursement based on Respondent's statements.
On July 14, 2014, the Board of Supervisors passed Resolution #14 -032 authorizing
payment of certain "recurring bills," including the bill for the Office Manager's cell phone,
that might become due and payable prior to the Board of Supervisors' official review and
approval. Respondent was one of the Supervisors who initialed Resolution #14 -032.
At the August 10, 2015, Township meeting, Supervisor Thomas M. Danner
( "Danner ") read a statement and made a motion to retroactively a prove the payments
from the Township for Respondent's cellular telephone, as detailedpin Fact Finding 19 a.
Respondent discussed the motion prior to its introduction and provided pre - meeting
information to Supervisor Danner in preparation for the motion. The motion to retroactively
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 17
approve the Township's payments for Respondent's cell phone dating back to January
2011 passed by a 3 -1 vote. Respondent abstained from the vote.
At no point was personal use of the Office Manager cellular telephone discussed
and /or authorized. However, Respondent utilized his cellular telephone for both personal
and Township - related purposes during the time period of January 4, 2011, through October
26, 2015. Between January 4, 2011, and October 26, 2015, Respondent made 687
personal telephone calls on his cellular telephone totaling16 hours 48 minutes and 49
seconds of personal usage. Between January 4, 2011, and October 26, 2015, Respondent
engaged in 6,304 personal text messages on his cellular telephone.
From January 10, 2011, to August 10, 2015, Respondent voted to approve 53 out of
56 monthly bill lists which included Township payments for the cost of his cellular
telephone.
From January 10, 2011, to July 29, 2015, Respondent received a total of $5,767.41
from the Township as payment for costs associated with his personal cellular telephone as
detailed in Fact Finding 24 a.
Respondent filed deficient SFIs for calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013.
Respondent's calendar year 2011 SFI was deficient because Respondent did not complete
Block Nos. 2 13, 14, and 15. Respondent's calendar year 2012 SFI was deficient because
Respondent did not complete Block Nos.13, 14, and 15. Respondent's calendar year 2013
SFI was deficient because Respondent did not complete Block Nos. 5 and 7. Block 2
requires the filer's address (either work or home) and telephone number. Block 5 requires
information pertaining to the filer's governmental entity in which he /she is /was an official,
employee, candidate, or nominee. Block 7 requires the calendar year for which the SFI is
being filed. Block 13 requires information pertaining to any office, directorship, or
employment in any business entity. Block 14 requires information pertaining to any
financial interest in any legal entity in business for profit. Block 15 requires information
pertaining to any business interests transferred to any immediate family member(s).
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 technical violation of Section 1103(a) of
the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when, after a
motion and second had been made to cancel
Sock's township- reimbursed cellular plan, Socks
participated in the discussion which preceded
the Supervisors' vote to withdraw the motion as
the plan was in his own name.
That a violation of Sections 1104(x) and
1105 b)(1),(8 }, 9 ,and (10) of the Public Official
and �mpployee E�hics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1104 {a}
and 1105(b)(1), {8 },(9),and (10 ,occurred when
Socks failed to disclose any office, directorship
or employment of an nature whatsoever in any
business entity, any fYnancial interest in any legal
entity engaged in business for profit, andlor the
Socks Jr., 15 -019
aaP 16 —
identity of any financial interest in a business
which in the preceding calendar year had been
transferred to a member of the reporting
person's immediate family, for Statements of
Financial Interests filed for the 2011 and 2012
calendar years; when he failed to include an
address on his 2011 calendar year statement of
financial interests; and when he failed to disclose
his public positionlgovernmental entity and
calendar year on a purported 2013 calendar year
statement of financial interests filing.
C. That any allegation not addressed by the
preceding subparagraphs is hereby nolle
prossed by the Investigative Division.
4. Socks agrees to make payment in the amount of $1,000.00 in
settlement of this matter.
a. Socks agrees to make a payment of $500.00
payable to Berwick Township and forwarded to
the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final
adjudication in this matter.
b. Socks 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.
Socks agrees to file complete and accurate amended
Statements of Financial Interests with Berwick Township,
through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for the
2011, 2012, and 2013 calendar years within thirty (30) days of
the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
6. Socks agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation
or other payment from Berwick Township representing a full or
partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this
matter.
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 apopriate
enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's failure to
comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or
cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to
review this matter further.
Consent A reement, at 2 -3.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page 19
In considering the Consent Agreement, we accept the recommendation of the
parties for a finding that a technical violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when, after a motion and second had been made to cancel
Respondent Sock's Township - reimbursed cellular plan, Respondent participated in the
discussion which preceded the Supervisors' vote to withdraw the motion.
The parties have stipulated that Respondent used the authority of his public position
to realize a private pecuniary benefit when he articipated in the May 28, 2013, discussion
of the Board of Supervisors which resulted in the Supervisors' withdrawal of the motion to
discontinue payments from the Township to Respondent for Respondent's cellular
telephone, and that the Board of Supervisors continued the reimbursement based on
Respondent's statements.
The parties have not quantified the private pecuniary benefit resulting from this
particular action of Respondent. In light of the Consent Agreement, it would appear that
the parties are in agreement the resulting private pecuniary benefit was not de minimis.
Given that: (1) the parties have entered into a comprehensive Consent Agreement
with the benefit of legal counsel to assist them in weighing all relevant factual and legal
considerations; and (2) the parties are in agreement that the finding of a technical violation
of Section 1103(a) as to Respondent's aforesaid participation in the May 28, 2013,
discussion of the Board of Supervisors would be appropriate as part of an overall
settlement of this case, we accept the parties' proposed disposition.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, we hold that a technical violation of
Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when, after a motion and
second had been made to cancel Respondent Sock's Township-reimbursed cellular plan,
Respondent participated in the discussion which preceded the Supervisors' vote to
withdraw the motion, as the plan was in his own name.
We agree with the parties, and we hold, that a violation of Sections 1104(a) and
1105 b 1 , 8 , 9 ,and ((10) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1'104(a) and
1105�b��1,�8�,�9,and (10), occurred when Respondent Socks failed to disclose any office,
directorship or employment of any nature whatsoever in any business entity, any financial
interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit, and/or the identity of any financial
interest in a business which in the preceding calendar year had been transferred to a
member of the reporting person's immediate family, for Statements of Financial Interests
filed for the 2011 and 2012 calendar years; when he failed to include an address on his
2011 calendar year statement of financial interests; and when he failed to disclose his
public position /governmental entity and calendar year on a purported 2013 calendar year
statement of financial interests filing.
Per the Consent Agreement, any allegation not addressed by the preceding
violations has been nolle prossed by the Investigative Division.
As part of the Consent Agreement, Socks has agreed to make payment in the total
amount of $1,000.00 in settlement of this matter as follows. Socks has agreed to make
payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to Berwick Township and forwarded to this
Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Socks has agreed 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 to be forwarded to
this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this
matter. Socks has further agreed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other
payment from Berwick Township representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount
paid in settlement of this matter. Finally, Socks has agreed to file complete and accurate
amended SFIs for calendar years 2011, 2012, and 2013 with the Township, through this
Commission, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Socks Jr., 15 -019
Page M
We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth a
proper disposition for this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis
and the totality of the facts and circumstances.
Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks is directed to make
payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to Berwick Township and forwarded to this
Commission by no later than the thirtieth (301h) day after the mailing date of this
adjudication and Order.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks 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.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks is directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Township representing a full or
partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
To the extent he has not already done so, Socks is directed to file complete and
accurate amended SFIs for the 2011, 2012, and 2013 calendar years with the Township,
through this Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30th) 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 Supervisor for Berwick Township ( "Township "), Adams County, Pennsylvania,
since January 4, 2010, Respondent Peter L. Socks, Jr. ( "Socks ") has been a public
official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act
( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.
2. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, a technical violation of Section 1103(a)
of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when, after a motion and second
had been made to cancel Sock's Township- reimbursed cellular plan, Socks
participated in the discussion which preceded the Supervisors' vote to withdraw the
motion, as the plan was in his own name.
3. A violation of Sections 1104(a ) and 11 05 b)(1), 8),(9),and (10) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. §§ 1104(a) and 1105(b)(1),(8), {9�,and 10), occurred when Socks failed to
disclose any office, directorship or employment of any nature whatsoever in any
business entity, any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for
profit, and/or the identity of any financial interest in a business which in the
preceding calendar year had been transferred to a member of the reporting person's
immediate family, for Statements of Financial Interests filed for the 2011 and 2012
calendar ears; when he failed to include an address on his 2011 calendar year
statement of financial interests; and when he failed to disclose his public
position /governmental entity and calendar year on a purported 2013 calendar year
statement of financial interests filing.
In Re: Peter L. Socks, Jr., File Docket: 15 -019
Respondent Date Decided: 11/28/17
Date Mailed: 1215117
ORDER NO. 1726
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, as a Supervisor for Berwick Township
( "Township "), Adams County, Pennsylvania, Peter L. Socks, Jr. ( "Socks ") technically
violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics
Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when, after a motion and second had been made to
cancel Sock's Township - reimbursed cellular plan, Socks participated in the
discussion which preceded the Supervisors' vote to withdraw the motion, as the plan
was in his own name.
A violation of Sections 1104(a ) and 1105 b)(1), 8),(9),and (10) of the Ethics Act, 65
Pa.C.S. §§ 1104(a) and 1105(b)(1),(8),(9�,and �10), occurred when Socks failed to
disclose any office, directorship or employment of any nature whatsoever in any
business entity, any financial interest to any legal entity engaged in business for
profit, and /or the identity of any financial interest in a business which in the
preceding calendar year had been transferred to a member of the reporting person's
immediate family, for Statements of Financial Interests filed for the 2011 and 2012
calendar years; when he failed to include an address on his 2011 calendar year
statement of financial interests; and when he failed to disclose his public
position /governmental entity and calendar year on a purported 2013 calendar year
statement of financial interests filing.
3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks is directed to make payment in
the amount of $500.00 payable to Berwick Township and forwarded to the
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30th) day after
the mailing date of this Order.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks 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.
5. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Socks is directed to not accept any
reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Township representing a
full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid to settlement of this matter.
6. To the extent he has not already done so, Socks is directed to file complete and
accurate amended Statements of Financial Interests for the 2011, 2012, and 2013
calendar years with the Township, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics
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.
BY THE COMMISSION,
9
tc o as . o a e a, air