HomeMy WebLinkAbout1727 PodroskeyPHONE 717 - 783 -1610
TOLL FREE: 1- 806. 932 -0936
In Re: Phillip P. Podroskey,
Respondent
n✓"\'
t
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.i)a.yov
16 -041
Order No. 1727
1/31/18
2/5/18
Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair
Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair
Roger Nick
Melanie DePalma
Monique Myatt Galloway
Michael A. Schwartz
Shelley Y. Simms
This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission.
Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted
an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics
Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et se q., by the above -named Respondent. At the
commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent
written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the
Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as
an Investigative Complaint. A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement were
subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated
Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been
approved.
ALLEGATIONS:
That Phillip Podroskey, a public official /public employee in his capacity as a Member
of the West Pike Run Township Board of Supervisors Washington County, violated
[Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), 1105(a), 1105(�b }(5), 1105(b ) (6), 'f 105(b)(7),
1105 b (8), and 1105(b (10 ] of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 5 Pa.C.S. §§
1103 a , 1104(a), 1104A, 105(a), 1105(b)(5), 1105(b)(6), 1105(b)(7), 1105(b)(8), and
1105 b (10), when he utilized the authority of his public position for a private pecuniary
bene it when he participated in discussions and actions of the Board of Supervisors to
a prove an Ordinance which authorized an amendment to the Township's General
Epmp)oyee Pension Plan to allow an early retirement window, thereby enabling himself to
receive full pension benefits before reaching normal retirement age; when he failed to file
Statement[s] of Financial Interests for calendar years 2011 and 2015; and when he filed
deficient Statement[s] of Financial Interests for calendar year 2012 by failing to complete
information concerning Office, Directorship, or Employment in any business, and Business
Interests Transferred to Immediate Family; 2013 calendar year by failing to complete
disclosures regarding Gifts, and Transportation. Lodging, Hospitality; 2014 calendar year
by not properly identifying the filing year, and failing to report the Township as a source of
income.
II. FINDINGS:
1. Phillip P. Podroskey has served as a Supervisor for West Pike Run Township
( "Township "), Washington County, from January 4, 2010, through the present.
Podroskey, 16 -041
age
a. Podroskey served as the Vice - Chairman of the [Township] Board of
Supervisors ( "Board ") in 2011, 2012, and 2014.
b. Podroskey has served as a non - working Roadmaster far the Township from
January 5, 2015, through the present.
2. Pod roskey was employed as a full -time working /labor Roadmaster for the Township
from January 4, 2010, through December 31, 2014.
a. Podroskey was previously employed by the Township for approximately 24
years as a police officer.
3. The Township is a second -class township governed by a three - Member Board.
a. The Township holds one regularly scheduled legislative meeting per month
on the second Monday of the month.
4. Township Supervisors receive a salary of $25.00 gross, per meeting, for services
rendered in their Supervisor /public official capacity.
5. Voting at Township meetings occurs in group "aye /nay" fashion after a motion is
properly made and seconded.
a. Any abstentions or objections cast during the vote are specifically noted
within the meeting minutes.
Minutes of each meeting are approved for accuracy at the subsequent
meeting.
6. The Township Supervisors receive a meeting packet for review immediately prior to
the convening of each regularly scheduled legislative meeting.
a. The meeting packets are prepared and provided to the Supervisors by the
Township Manager — Secretary/Treasurer.
7. The meeting packets routinely consist of the upcomin meeting agenda, a copy of
the prior month's meeting minutes, multiple reports inancia /Treasurer, Police,
Roads, Parks and Recreation, etc.) and a listing of all bills received and paid for the
prior month.
8. A specific motion and vote is taken at each legislative meeting to approve payment
of payroll and the prior month's bills.
a. Approval of payroll and the prior month's bills is completed via one
encompassing motion and vote.
b. The Township Manager -- Secretary/Treasurer issues checks in payment of
bills received upon receipt/shortly after receipt of such.
C. The vote taken at each legislative meeting to approve payroll and payment of
invoices for the prior month is a retroactive approval.
9. Signature authority over Township accounts is maintained by all three Supervisors
and the Township Manager — Secretary/Treasurer.
a. Township checks issued require the signature of any combination of two of
the authorized signatories.
Podroske , 16 -041
age
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO THE HISTORICAL AND OPERATIONAL
BACKGROUND OF THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF BOROUGHS AND
ITS MUNICIPAL RETIREMENT TRUST PROGRAM.
10. The Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs ( "PSAB" ) is a statewide, non-
partisan, non - profit organization serving approximately 956 borough governments
within the Commonwealth.
a. PSAB also provides program services to other municipal entities such as
cities, townships, municipal authorities, Council of Governments, regional
police departments, etc., which are active PSAB members.
11. The PSAB sponsors multiple group, benefit programs for its member clients
including, but not limited to, the Municipal Retirement Trust ( "MRT ").
a. The MRT is a comprehensive, professionally managed pension program,
designed to meet the investment needs of municipal government.
b. The purposelobjective of the MRT is to assist municipal entities in
maintaining the viability of their respective pension plans.
12. The two most common types of municipal pension plans in existence are defined
contribution pension plans and defined benefit pension plans.
a. A defined contribution pension plan is a retirement plan designed to accept
fixed contributions which are allocated to individual accounts to provide a
benefit upon retirement with the benefit typically paid in a lump sum.
b. A defined benefit pension plan is a retirement plan designed to pay a specific
benefit to a retiree upon retirement with the benefit typically paid monthly for
the remainder of the retiree's lifetime.
13. Funding for municipal pension plans is routinely composed of employee participant
contributions, employer contributions, and investment returns.
a. Employee participant contribution mandates are delineated within the
applicable Plan Joinder Agreement.
1. The Joinder Agreement is the specific document adopted by the
emplo er of the participating plan which sets forth specific definitions,
beneas, and provisions elected by the employer to be interpreted in
conjunction with the provisions of the plan.
b. Employer contributions /financial requirements of the pension plan, known as
the Minimum Municipal Obligation (' MMO "), are determined annually for the
following plan year by the P a. - Chief Administrative Officer.
1. The MMO is the amount of money that must be a to a
pension plan by a municipality for a given year, payable able f om
municipality's revenues.
THE FOLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO THE TOWNSHIP'S MEMBERSHIP IN THE
PSAB MRT AND CHANGES MADE TO THE TOWNSHIP'S PLAN/JOINDER
AGREEMENT OVER THE LIFE OF THE PLAN.
14. The Township initiated interest in pursuing a municipal pension plan with the PSAB
MRT as of at least January 7, 1994.
Podroske , 16 -041
age
15. The Township established a defined benefit pension plan, as part of the PSAB
Master Plan and Trust, for its employees via the approval of Township Ordinance
No. 94 -3 at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Board on December 12, 1994.
Ordinance No. 94 -3 adopted the Joinder Agreement and the terms of the
PSAB Master Plan and Trust, to be known as the West Pike Run Township
General Employees Pension Plan ( "Plan ").
1. The Joinder Agreement is the document adopted b the employer of
the participating plan, which sets forth specific definitions, benefits,
and provisions elected by the employer to be interpreted in
conjunction with the provisions of the plan (e.g., normal retirement
age, eligibility requirements, participation contributions, early
retirement benefits, vesting schedule, etc.).
16. On December 9, 2002, and again on January 7, 2013, the Supervisors approved
amendments to the original Plan Joinder Agreement, which resulted in changes to
the existing Plan.
a. Ordinance No. 2002 -1 and 2013 -1 each effectively adopted the re- stated
PSAB Master Plan and Trust and the accompanying Joinder Agreement.
Chapter III, Article Xl, Section 11.01 of the Master Plan and Trust document
addresses amendments of the Joinder Agreement and mandates, in part, the
following:
1. The employer has the right to amend its Joinder Agreement at any
time through execution of a revised Joinder Agreement executed on
behalf of the employer by an authorized official and by transmitting
the revised Joinder Agreement to the Administrator for approval and
acceptance.
Chapter 111, Article XII, Section 12.03 addresses benefit plan modifications
and mandates that prior to the adoption of any benefit plan modification by
the employer, the Chief Administrative Officer of the Plan must provide a cost
estimate of the proposed benefit plan modification to the Board to be
prepared by an approved actuary.
17. Various provisions (e.g. including original mandates and/or changes) were
incorporated into the Township Plan Joinder Agreements adopted between the time
frame of December 12, 1994, through January 1, 2013, including the following:
a. Normal Retirement Age:
A participant's normal retirement age was defined as the attainment of
age 65.
aa. No early retirement window provision was present in the
original Joinder Agreement, the 2001 amendment, orthe 2012
amendment.
The normal retirement age remained unchanged throughout the life of
the original Joinder Agreement, the 2001 amendment, and the 2012
amendment.
b, Early Retirement Benefits:
A participant's early retirement date was defined as the first of the
Podroskey, 16 -041
Page 5
month coinciding with or next following the attainment of age 62.
aa. Under Part IV -2(B) of the Joinder Agreement, a participant
electing to retire under the early retirement provision is entitled
to receive either:
A deferred pension commencing at the participant's
normal retirement date equal to that documented under
Part IV- 2(C)(i) of the Joinder Agreement; or
An immediate pension commencing on the participant's
early retirement date or on any date intervening
between the participant's early retirement date and the
articipant's normal retirement date equal to the amount
rof) the benefit described in Part lV- 2(C)(i) of the
Joinder Agreement reduced in accordancewi h Part IV-
2(C)(ii) of the Joinder Agreement.
2. The early retirement provision was added to the 2001 amendment of
the Township Plan Joinder Agreement and remained unchanged
throughout the life of the 2012 amendment.
aa. No earn retirement provision existed in the original Township
Plan Joinder Agreement.
C. Vesting Schedule:
No vesting schedule was adopted in the original Joinder Agreement,
the 2001 amendment, or the 2012 amendment.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO PODROSKEY'S PARTICIPATION IN
DISCUSSIONS AND ACTIONS OF THE BOARD WHICH RESULTED IN CHANGES TO
THE TOWNSHIP PENSION PLAN AND PODROSKEY'S RECEIPT OF PENSION PLAN
BENEFITS PRIOR TO EXISTING EARLY OR NORMAL RETIRMENT AGES.
18. Podroskey enrolled as a participant in the Township Plan effective January 1, 2010.
a. Podroskey completed an enrollment form for the Plan on or about February
26, 2010.
1. Podroskey listed his date of birth as [birth date redacted].
2. Podroskey identified his date of hire as August 6, 1986.
aa. Podroskey erroneously provided his date of hire as a Township
police officer on the enrollment form.
bb. Podroskey's effective date of hire as a Township Roadmaster
was January 1, 2010.
b. Supervisor- Secretary/Treasurer Stephen Hajdu certified Podroskey's
enrollment form on behalf of the Township.
C. Podroskey's enrollment form was received by Mockenhaupt Benefits Group
(hereafter "Mockenhaupt ") on March 4, 2010.
19, Once enrolled, Podroskey contributed funds to the Township Plan in the amount of
5% of his gross wages earned.
PodroSke 16 -041
ag
20. Contributions from Plan participants' wages are automatically withheld from the
participants' earnings and subsequently forwarded to PSAB by the Township.
a. The 5% participant contribution rate has remained static in
every Plan
Joinder Agreement adopted by the Township.
21. The Township was required to pay an MMO into the Township Plan for calendar
years 2011 through 2017, as calculated by Mockenhaupt, as shown below:
MMO for Buduet Year Amount Required Actual Amount Paid by Township
Difference
- 457.60
2011— 4, 0 5.0 3, 27.40
2012 $3,100.00 $6,200.03
$3,100.03
$1,820.81
2013 $3,752.00 $5,572.81
2014 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
2015 $0.00 $0.00
2016 $0.00 $0.00
$0.00
$0.0I 0
2017 $0.00 NIA
22. The Township has utilized Mockenhaupt to provide actuarial services for its Plan
since the inception of the Plan in 1994.
a. Carrie Troutman has served as Mockenhaupt's main contact for the
Township since approximately 201012011.
23. In or about 2013, Troutman scheduled a meeting at the Township building to
educate Erin Sakalik on her responsibilities as the Pension Administrator for the
Township.
a. Erin Sakalik was hired as the Township Secretary/Treasurer and Pension
Administrator.
b. Troutman met later that same day with the plan participants as a whole to
review the Plan, how it operated, etc.
1. Plan particippants at that time were Podroskey, Sakalik, and
Supervisor /Roadmaster Rick Molish.
24. During the meeting, Troutman informed the Plan participants that it was
possible /permissible to alter andlor improve the existing Plan and
acknowledged /confirmed the absence of a vesting provision within the existing Plan.
25. Due to interest in adding a vesting provision, Troutman informed those present that
a study was required prior to any modifications, so that the Township had
knowledge of how adding a vesting period may potentially affect the plan's
contribution requirements, costs, etc.
26. Following the 2013 meeting with Troutman, the Township authorized Mockenhaupt
to complete an actuarial study in anticipation of adding a vesting provision to the
existing Plan.
a. The study included three potential vesting provision options as follows:
1. 100% after 5 years;
2. 25% after 5 years, 50% after 7 years, 75% after 9 years, and 100%
after 11 years; and
3. 100% after 11 years.
Podroske , 16 -041
P
b. The Mockenhaupt actuarial study noted that "...because the supervisors who
are members of the plan are elected to serve (and work for the Township) for
6 year terms.... its highly likely that participants will not work for the
Township for many years as is likely in a'normal' employment situation."
27. The results of the study were presented to the Township via correspondence dated
November 1, 2013, from Diane Sokol, Mockenhaupt Actuarial Analyst addressed to
Sakalik.
a. The results of the study identified no immediate cost associated with adding
a vesting provision to the Plan.
1. Despite no indicated fee, the Township did not pursue amendment of
the Joinder Agreement at that time to incorporate any of the vesting
provisions studied.
2. Without a vesting provision, any Plan participant who terminated
under the Plan existing at that time was eligible to receive only a
refund of his/her contributions with interest.
b. The Township took no steps to amend or otherwise alter the Plan until the
summer /fall of 2014.
28. As of at least spring/early summer of 2014, Podroskey made comments to various
Township employees of his interest in retiring from his employment as a
road masterlworking supervisor at the conclusion of 2014.
a. Podroskey was 58 years old during the spring/early summer of 2014.
1. Normal retirement age for the Plan during the spring/early summer of
2014 was 65.
2. Early retirement age for the Plan during the spring/early summer of
2014 was 62.
b. The Plan had no vesting provision in place during the spring/early summer of
2014.
29. On August 15, 2014, Township Assistant Secretary/Treasurer Jo Dee Molish
informed Sokol that effective August 28, 2014, Ruth Dodds was to begin as the new
Township Manager- Secretary/Treasurer and as the Township contact person for the
Plan.
a. In her August 15, 2014, email to Sokol, Jo Dee Molish also questioned if the
Plan had a vesting provision; if a retirement age existed for collection of full
retirement benefits; if penalties existed for early retirement; and if an
individual could purchase time back from previous Township employment if
he had taken out his monies earlier.
b. Jo Dee Molish's email specifically documented, "One of our Supervisor's sic
who is employed as a 'Roadmaster' is contemplating retirement and had
questioned me on this."
1. Podroskey was the only Plan participant who was also Roadmaster.
30. Troutman subsequently contacted Jo Dee Molish and expressed her interest in
meeting with Jo Dee Molish and Dodds to review Plan provisions, administrative
Podroske , 16 -041
age
tasks, and fundinglreporting requirements.
a. During or about late August 2014, Podroskey directed Dodds to schedule a
meeting with a representative from Mockenhaupt in order to discuss his
potential retirement.
b. Dodds and Troutman spoke on or about August 26, 2014, and scheduled a
meeting for September 17, 2014, at the Township building specifically to
review the Plan.
1. Dodds did not inform Troutman prior to the meeting of Podroskey's
potential retirement.
31. On September 17, 2014, Troutman discussed various outstanding Plan issues,
required recordkeeping, procedures, etc., with Dodds and Molish and met with
Dodds, Jo Dee Molish, Molish, and Podroskey.
a. Podroskey and Molish were the only Plan participants at that time.
32. During the meeting, questions were posed regarding the addition of a vesting
provision, as well as other amendments to the Plan.
a. Podroskey was present and participated in the discussion.
33. Troutman was made aware during the meeting of Podroskey's interest in retiring
from his employment as a working supervisorlroadmaster.
a. Molish stated that Podroskey had retired from Township employment as a
police officer, but received no monthly pension because the Township police
pension plan had no vesting period.
b. Molish also questioned Troutman if anything could be done other than
addin' a vesting period, to enable Podroskey to retire and receive some
financial benefit.
34. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Township requested that Mockenhaupt
perform a new study for the Plan regarding implementation of a five-year vesting
provision, as well as a reduction in normal retirement age from that of 65 to 62.
a. A five -year vesting period was selected due to the following:
1. Township Supervisors are elected to six -year terms and have no
guarantee of being re- elected upon completion of [the] initial term.
2. Podroskey was due to have accrued a total of five years of Township
employment as of December 31, 2014.
b. A reduction in early retirement age or allowance for an early retirement
window was not presented or discussed at the meeting.
35. Troutman forwarded the details of the new Township actuarial study to Sokol via
email on September 18, 2014, which calculated the following:
a. Completion of a study changing the Normal Retirement Age to 62 with 100%
vesting after five years of service and changing Early Retirement Age to 60
with 100% vesting after five years;
b. Preparation of an estimated vested benefit calculation for Podroskey under
Podroske , 16 -041
Page
the proposed changes, and
C. Implementation of the changes by December 2014.
36. On September 19, 2014, Troutman sent an email transmission to the Township
addressing the subject of "2015 MMO Worksheet & Pension Benefit Study.
a. Included within the body of the email was that Troutman had "...thought
further about Mr. Podroskey's situation" and had included in the email an
additional option for the Township to consider in relation to Podroskey's
retirement.
1. Troutman proposed an option of creating a retirement window that
would allow Podroskey to retire with immediate benefits upon his
termination at the end of 2014 rather than a deferred benefit which
would begin at the age of 62.
37. On September 23, 2014, Troutman sent a follow -up email to Sokol which confirmed
that, in addition to the on inal study requested, Ruth Dodds from the Township also
wanted a study on the following:
"Permanently adding 900% vesting after five years of service
and changing normal retirement age to age 62, in combination
with a temporary window for participants who are age 59 and
have five years of service that retire on or before 0910912015
allows for immediate commencement of the accrued benefit."
a. Dodds made that request based on interactions with Supervisors, including
Podroskey.
b. Podroskey would turn 59 years old on October 16, 2014, and complete five
years of service on December 31, 2014.
38. Upon completion of the study, Sokol authored two pieces of correspondence to the
Township, each dated September 25, 2014, in relation to the Plan.
a. Sokol authored a study letter which addressed the cost impact to the
Township as a result of the proposed benefit enhancements to the Plan.
b. The second letter addressed Podroskey's estimated deferred vested benefit,
as well as Podroskey's estimated window retirement benefit, based on the
September 25, 2014, study letter.
39. Sokol's correspondence detailing Podroskey's estimated Plan benefits specified that
the Plan Joinder Agreement required an amendment, to include one of the
proposals as adopted by the Township, prior to Podroskey being eligible to receive
he newly enacted retirement benefit.
a. Without the amendment, Podroskey would only receive a refund of his
employee contributions with interest upon separation from the Township.
b. Amending the Plan Joinder Agreement to reduce the normal retirement age
from 65 to 62 coupled with adding a five -year vesting period, would enable
Podroskey to collect a monthly pension plan beginning on November 1,
2017.
C. Amending the Plan Joinder Agreement to include a retirement window
allowed any Plan participant who was 59 years old, with five years of service,
Podroskey, 16 -041
age
who terminated employment with the Township on or before December 31,
2014, to receive a monthly benefit commencing January 1, 2015.
1. Podroskey was the only Plan participant eligible to participate in the
early retirement window option.
2. Attached to the September 25, 2014, correspondence was a benefit
calculation specific to Podroskey.
40. Dodds distributed Sokol's September 25, 2014, actuarial study letter to the
Township Supervisors for review and consideration.
a. Sokol's letter identified three separate benefit enhancement proposals and
the cost impact each would have on the plan.
1. Proposals two and three included the addition of the retirement
window, to allow Podroskey to retire on or before December 31, 2014.
b. The Supervisors, including Podroskey, elected via the passage of an
ordinance to accept the amendments to the Plan, including reduction of
normal retirement age to 62, reduction of early retirement age to 60, addition
of a five -year vesting period, and inclusion of an early retirement window as
proposed.
41. Following the Supervisors' acceptance of the proposal, Troutman contacted Linda
Costa, PSAB MRT Chief Operations Officer, on October 15, 2014, regarding the
Township's desire to amend the Plan.
a. Troutman identified December 1, 2014, as the effective date for the
amended Joinder Agreement.
42. On or about October 23, 2014, Costa provided Dodds' correspondence, three
updated draft copies of the Plan Joinder Agreement (with the specified changes)
and a sample revised ordinance for the Township's review and approval.
a. The correspondence verified the amendments made to the Normal
Retirement Age (which included the early retirement window), Early
Retirement Benefits, and vesting schedule of the Joinder Agreement.
b. The correspondence requested the Township to sign, date, and return all
three copies of the Joinder Agreement for approval and execution by PSAB,
with one copy to be returned to the Township upon approval and execution.
C. The correspondence directed the Township to forward a copy of the
signed /dated revised ordinance to Costa for the MRT's files.
43. At the Township's regularly scheduled November 10, 2014, legislative meeting,
Podroskey motioned, seconded by Supervisor Laura Hough, for the Township
Solicitor to prepare the General Employee's Joiner [sic] for the Plan.
a. The minutes inaccurately reflect the motion being made in relation to the
Solicitor's preparation of a "Joiner" instead of an Ordinance adopting the
amended Joinder Agreement.
b. The motion passed via unanimous 3 -0 vote.
44. At the Township's regularly scheduled December 8, 2014, legislative meeting,
Podroskey motioned, seconded by Hough, to accept Ordinance 2014 -3 approving
the revisions to the General Employees Joinder Pension Fund.
Podroskey, 16 -041
age
a. The motion passed via 3 -0 unanimous vote.
b. Ordinance 2014 -3 bears Podroskey's, Molish's, and Hough's signatures.
45. On December 9, 2014, Dodds informed Troutman that the Supervisors had adopted
the new Joinder Agreement at the Township's regular legislative meeting held on
December 8, 2014.
a. Troutman's notes from the conversation with Dodds record, in part, the
following:
"...the Supervisors adopted the joinder agreement last
night which amends the plan to allow Mr. Podroskey to
retire at the end of this year with immediate benefits."
46. Troutman subsequently provided the Township with a Benefit Application for
Podroskey to complete and request Mockenhaupt to calculate his new retirement
benefit.
a. Podroskey completed the Benefit Application form on or about December 27,
2014.
b. Podroskey documented the benefit type he was applying for as "early
retirement" with a date of January 1, 2015.
C. Podroskey's signature is present in the "Employee Signature" section of the
form.
d. Dodds signed Podroskey's Benefit Application on December 30, 2014, on
behalf of the Township.
47. On or about December 31, 2014, Costa sent correspondence to the Township
acknowledging MRT's execution of the amended Joinder Agreement for the Plan.
a. Costa also noted that an executed copy of the Joinder Agreement had been
sent to Mockenhaupt, with the last copy being maintained by PSAB.
48. Podroskey's final day as a working Supervisor /Roadmaster for the Township was
December 31, 2014, with his retirement as a Township employee effective January
1, 2015.
49. Between January 5, 2015, and January 19, 2015, Troutman and Dodds had multiple
communications relating to the Plan's 2015 Actuarial Valuation Report, Employee
Statements & Act 205 Reporting Form, the December 31, 2014, Financial
Statements, and Podroskey's retirement.
a. In an email dated January 12, 2015, Troutman confirmed receipt of the fully
executed Joinder Agreement from PSAB which "... includes the benefit
changes that enable Mr. Podroskey to retire early."
b. On or about January 22, 2015, Troutman confirmed Mockenhaupt's
calculation of a normal retirement benefit for Podroskey under the retirement
window in effect through the date of Podroskey's termination of employment.
1. Accompanying the correspondence was a two -page Benefit Option
Election form to be completed and forwarded to PSAB MRT in order
to process Podroskey's retirement.
Po�droskk , 16 -041
agP a 12
C. Mockenhaupt utilized the sum of Podroskey's annual base wages per year,
from 2010 through 2014, divided by 60 months (as detailed below) in order to
compute Podroskey's average monthly compensation figure:
2010: $33,966.40
2011: $37,440.00
2012: $38,584.00
2013: $40,664.00
2014: $41.912.00
Total: 192,666.40 _ 60 months = $3,209.44
d. Podroskey's average monthly compensation figure and years of service were
utilized to calculate Podroskey's monthly benefit calculation of $160.47
($3,209.44 in average monthly compensation multiplied by 5 years of service
multiplied by 1% _ $160.47).
e. Podroskey elected to receive a monthly benefit payable in the amount of
$160.47 for life with payments to cease upon death.
1. Podroskey signed the Benefit Option Election form on February 2,
2015, in the "Employee Signature" section of the form.
2. Dodds signed Podroskey's Benefit Application on February 3, 2015,
on behalf of the Township.
50. On February 4, 2015, Douglas Werley, CPA, Thomas J. Anderson & Associates,
Inc., authored correspondence to Robert Mast, CPA, Hamilton & Musser authorizing
the commencement of a retiree benefit for Podroskey in the amount of $160.47 per
month.
a. Werley's correspondence identified Podroskey's effective benefit date as
January 1, 2015.
b. Included within the correspondence was instruction that Podroskey be paid a
total of $320.94 for the months of January and February 2015 as soon as
possible.
1. Recipients' benefits are paidlissued at the beginning of each month
per the Plan Joinder Agreement.
51. From February 2015 through July 2017, Podroskey received thirty checks totaling
$4,974.57 from the PSAB MRT in association with his retirement from the Township
as a working SupervisorlRoadmaster as detailed below:
Check Date Check Number Check Amount
02/05/2015 036850 $320.94
03/01/2015 037039 $160.47
04/01/2015 037226 $160.47
05/01/2015 037405 $160.47
06/01/2015 037589 $160.47
07/01/2015 037761 $160.47
08/01/2015 037930 $160.47
09/01/2015 038116 $160.47
10/01/2015 038293 $160.47
11/01/2015 038458 $160.47
12/01/2015 038623 $160.47
01/02/2016 038798 $160.47
02/02/2016 038958 $160.47
03/01/2016 038160 $160.47
04/01/2016 039359 $160.47
Podroske , 16 -041
V fF
Check Date
Check Number Check
Arn
06/01/2016
039743 $160.47
07/01/2016
039913 $160.47
08/01/2016
040097 $160.47
09/01/2016
040277 $160.47
10/01/2016
040446 $160.47
11/01/2016
040607
$160.47
12101/2016
040774
$160.47
01/02/2017
041009
$160.47
02/01/2017
041176
$160.47
03/01/2017
041372
$160.47
04/01/2017
041559
$160.47
05/01/2017
041723
$160,47
06/01/2017
041903
$160.47
07/01/2017
042067
$160.47
Total
$4,974.57
52. Absent the approval of Township Ordinance No. 2014 -3, authorizing changes in the
Township Joinder Agreement, Podroskey would not have been... eligible to receive
a monthly pension upon his December 31, 2014, retirement from Township
employment.
a. Without the inclusion of a five -year vesting period within the Township
Joinder Agreement, Podroskey would only have been eligible to receive his
employee contributions plus any accrued interest at the time of his
retirement.
b. Without the inclusion of an early retirement window into the Plan Joinder
Agreement, Podroskey would not have been eligible to receive pension
payments upon his December 31, 2014, retirement.
53. During an interview with a Commission investigator on August 2, 2017, Podroskey
asserted, in part, the following:
a. Podroskey was not well - versed with or knowledgeable of the specifics of the
Township Plan;
b. Podroskey did not have confidence in the accuracy of the Township
records /documentation of the Township meetings and/or transactions as
prepared and kept by the Township Secretary/Treasurer — Township
Manager during his tenure;
C. Podroskey trusted that the individuals serving as the Township Secretary/
Treasurer — Township Manager Township Solicitor (Herman Bigi), Township
retained actuary (Mockenhaupt), as well as The Trust, were taking proper
action with The Township Plan and any changes thereto, during his tenure;
d. Podroskey had no recollection of discussing Plan amendments with
Troutman and other Township representatives at the September 17, 2014,
meeting at the Township building;
e. Podroskey could not recall with certainty if he was present at the September
17, 2014, meeting;
f. Podroskey was unaware that the early retirement window added to the Plan
was done for his sole benefit; his recollection of his understanding was that
the amendments were being considered /made to generally enhance the Plan
for the benefit of all of the participants;
g. Podroskey would not have agreed to the addition of the early retirement
Podroske , 15 -041
V
window or voted in favor of the Ordinance approving the addition of the
window to the Township Plan if he had been aware that the window was
added for his sole benefit;
Podroskey would not have agreed to the early retirement window or voted in
favor of the Ordinance approving the addition of the window if he had been
aware that a requirement existed for the Township Board of Auditors to
approve the Ordinance before consideration by the Supervisors and that
requirement had not been met; and
Podroskey would not have agreed to the early retirement window or voted in
favor of the Ordinance approving the addition of the window if the Township
Solicitor had advised him that he should abstain and/or that it could
potentially constitute a conflict of interest or ethics violation on his part.
54. As of October 31, 2017, Podroskey will have... received pension checks of no less
than $5,295.51. This includes amounts contributed by Podroskey himself in the
amount of 5% of his total gross wages during the period in which he was working as
Roadmaster for the Township. The Township made no contributions. As a result of
his participation in discussions and meetings as, Township Supervisor regarding
the amending of the Township pension Plan to include an "early retirement window'
which allowed any Plan participant who was 59 years old, with five years of service
who terminated employment with the Township on or before December 31, 2014, to
have a monthly benefit commencing . January 1, 2015 (for which only he met the
eligibility requirement at that time); and his actions in voting to approve and signing
Township Ordinance No. 2014 -3, which authorized said changes to the Plan Joinder
Agreement, Podroskey received a private pecuniary benefit of $1,443.23,
representing the pension checks received from January 5, 2015, through
September 20'16.
Ill. DISCUSSION:
As a Supervisor for West Pike Run Township ( "Township "), Washington County,
from January 4, 2010, through the present, Phillip P. Podroskey, also referred to herein as
"Respondent," "Respondent Podroskey, and Podroskey, 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 se .
The allegations are that Podroskey violated Sections 1103 a), 1104(a), 1104(d),
1105(a), 1105(b)(5) , 1105(b)(6 , 1105(b)(7), 1105(b)(8), and 1105(b (10) of the Ethics Act,
65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1103 (a), 11 4�a), 1104(d), 1105 (a), 1105(b)(5), 105(b)(6), 1 105(b) {7 },
1105(b)(8), and 1105(b)(10):
(1) When he utilized the authority of his public position for a private pecuniary
benefit when he participated in discussions and actions of the Township
Board of Supervisors ("Board") to approve an Ordinance which authorized an
amendment to the Township's General Employee Pension Plan ( "Plan ") to
allow an early retirement window, thereby enabling himself to receive full
pension benefits before reaching normal retirement age;
(2) When he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests ( "SFIs ") for calendar
years 2011 and 2015; and
(3) When he filed deficient SFIs for calendar years 2012, 2013 and 2014 by:
(a) Failing to complete information concerning Office, Directorship, or
Employment in any business, and Business Interests Transferred to
Immediate Family on his 2012 calendar year SFI;
Podroske , 16 -041
Page
(b) Failing to complete disclosures regarding Gifts and Transportation/
Lodging /Hospitality on his 2013 calendar year SFI; and
(c) Not properly identifying the filing year and failing to report the
Township as a source of income on his 2014 calendar year SFI.
Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, the Investigative Division has exercised
its pprosecutorial discretion to nol pros the allegations under Sections 1104(a), 1104(d),
1105(a), 1105(b)(5), 1105(b)(6), 1105(b)(7), 1105(b)(S), and 1105(b)(10) of the Ethics Act.
Based upon the nol pros, we need only address the allegations under Section 1103(a) of
the Ethics Act; we need not address the 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 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 pecuniary benefit of the public official /public
employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a
member of his immediate family is associated.
As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of
Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this
Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein.
The Board consists of three Members. Respondent Podroskey has served as a
Township Supervisor from January 4, 2010, through the present. Respondent served as
Vice- Chairman of the Board in 2011, 2012, and 2014.
Podroske , 16 -041
age
Prior to the time period under review, Respondent was a Township police officer.
The Stipulated Findings indicate that when Respondent took office in 2010, he had already
retired from employment as a Township police officer and had not received a ppension
because the Township police pension plan had no vesting period. Fact Finding 33 a.
Upon taking office as a Township Supervisor, Respondent was employed as a full -
time working labor Roadmaster for the Township from January 4, 2010, through December
31, 2014. The effective date of Respondent's hiring as a Township Roadmaster was
January 1, 2010. This case pertains to Respondent's actions in furtherance of receiving a
Township pension upon retiring from his position as a full -time working /labor Roadmaster
effective January 1, 2015,
The Township has a defined benefit pension plan for its employees known as the
"West Pike Run Township General Employees Pension Plan" ( "Plan "). The Plan was
established in 1994 as part of the Pennsylvania State Association of Boroughs ( "PSAB ")
Municipal Retirement Trust. The Ordinance approving the establishment of the Plan
adopted the Joinder Agreement and terms of the PSAB Master Plan and Trust. The
Township has the right to amend its Joinder Agreement at any time.
Mockenhaupt Benefits Group (hereafter "Mockenhaupt ") provides actuarial services
for the Plan. Carrie Troutman ( "Troutman ") has served as ockenhaupt's main contact for
the Township since approximately 201012011.
Respondent enrolled as a participant in the Plan effective January 1, 2010. In or
about 2013, Troutman met with the Plan participants, which included Respondent,
Township Secretary/Treasurer and Pension Administrator Erin Sakalik ( "Sakalik "), and
Supervisor / Roadmaster Rick Molish. During the meetin , Troutman indicated: (1) that at
that time, the Plan did not have a vesting provision; (2 that the Plan could be altered
and/or improved; and (3) that a study would be required prior to any modifications.
Following the aforesaid meeting with Troutman, the Township authorized Mockenhaupt to
complete an actuarial study in anticipation of adding a vesting provision to the Plan.
The Mockenhaupt actuarial study results were presented to the Township via
correspondence dated November 1, 2013, from Diane Sokol ( "Sokol "), Mockenhaupt
Actuarial Analyst, to Sakalik. The study included several vesting options including an
option for 100% vesting after 5 years. The Township took no steps to amend or otherwise
alter the Plan until the summer /fall of 2014.
As of at least spring /early summer of 2014, Respondent made comments to various
Township employees regarding his interest in retiring from his employment as a
Roadmaster /working Supervisor at the conclusion of 2014. Respondent was 58 years old
during the spring/early summer of 2014. Normal retirement age for the Plan during the
spring/early summer of 2014 was 65. Early retirement age for the Plan during the
spring/early summer of 2014 was 62. The Plan had no vesting provision in place during
the springlearly summer of 2014. Without a vesting provision, any Plan participant who
terminated Township employment prior to qualifying for retirement was eligible to receive
only a refund of his/her contributions with interest.
On August 15, 2014, Township Assistant Secretary/Treasurer Jo Dee Molish
informed Sokol that effective August 28, 2014, Ruth Dodds (' Dodds ") was to begin as the
new Township Manager- Secretary/Treasurer and as the Township contact person for the
Plan. Jo Dee Molish questioned if the Plan had a vesting provision; if a retirement age
existed for collection of full retirement benefits; if penalties existed for early retirement; and
if an individual could purchase time back from previous Township employment if he had
taken out his monies earlier. Jo Dee Molish specifically indicated that one of the
Township's Supervisors employed as a Roadmaster was contemplating retirement and had
questioned Jo Dee Molish about this. Troutman subsequently contacted Jo Dee Molish
and expressed her interest in meeting with Jo Dee Molish and Dodds to review Plan
Podroske , 16 -041
age
provisions, administrative tasks, and funding /reporting requirements.
During or about late August 2014, Respondent directed Dodds to schedule a
meeting with a representative from Mockenhaupt in order to discuss his potential
retirement.
On September 17, 2014, Troutman met with Dodds, Jo Dee Molish, Rick Molish,
and Respondent. During the meeting, questions were posed regarding the addition of a
vesting provision as well as other amendments to the Plan. Respondent was present and
participated in the discussion. During the meeting, Troutman was made aware of
Respondent's interest in retiring from his employment as a working Supervisor/
Roadmaster. Rick Molish stated that Respondent had retired from Township employment
as a police officer but received no monthly pension because the Township police pension
plan had no vesting period. Rick Molish also questioned Troutman if anything could be
done other than adding a vesting period, to enable Respondent to retire and receive some
financial benefit. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Township requested that
Mockenhaupt perform a new study for the Plan regarding implementation of a five -year
vesting provision and a reduction in normal retirement age from 65 to 62. A five -year
vesting period was selected due to the following: (1) Township Supervisors are elected to
six -year terms and have no guarantee of being re- elected; and (2) Respondent was due to
have accrued a total of five years of Township employment as of December 31, 2014. A
reduction in early retirement age or allowance for an early retirement window was not
presented or discussed at the meeting.
On September 18, 2014, Troutman forwarded the details of the new Township
actuarial study to Sokol. On September 19, 2014, Troutman sent an email to the Township
proposing an additional option of creating a retirement window that would allow
Respondent to retire with immediate benefits upon his termination at the end of 2014 rather
than a deferred benefit which would begin at the age of 62. On September 23, 2014,
Troutman sent a follow -up email to Sokol which confirmed that, in addition to the original
study requested, Dodds also wanted a study on the following: "Permanentlyadding 100%
vesting after five years of service and changing normal retirement age to age 62, in
combination with a temporary window for partici ants who are age 59 and have five years
of service that retire on or before 0110112015 allows for immediate commencement of the
accrued benefit." Fact Findina 37. Dodds made that request based on interactions with
Supervisors, inclu mg Respondent. Respondent would turn 59 years old on October 16,
2014, and complete five years of service on December 31, 2014.
Upon completion of the study, Sokol authored two pieces of correspondence to the
Township, each dated September 25, 2014, in relation to the Plan. Sokol authored a study
letter which addressed the cost impact to the Township as a result of the proposed benefit
enhancements to the Plan. The second letter addressed Respondent's estimated deferred
vested benefit, as well as Respondent's estimated window retirement benefit, based on the
September 25, 2014, study letter. Sokol's correspondence detailing Respondent's
estimated Plan benefits specified that the Plan Joinder Agreement would have to be
amended in order for Respondent to be eligible to receive the new retirement benefit. If
the Plan Joinder Agreement was not amended, Respondent would only receive a refund of
his employee contributions with interest upon separation from the Township.
Amending he Plan Joinder Agreement to reduce the normal retirement age from 65
to 62 coupled with adding a five -year vesting period would enable Respondent to collect a
monthly pension plan beginning on November 1, 2017. Amending the Plan Joinder
Agreement to include a retirement window allowed any Plan participant who was 59 years
old, with five years of service, who terminated employment with the Township on or before
December 31, 2014, to receive a monthly benefit commencing January 1, 2015.
Respondent was the only Plan participant eligible to participate in the early retirement
window option.
Rgdroske , 16 -041
Page 18 y
Dodds distributed Sokol's September 25, 2014, actuarial study letter to the
Township Supervisors for review and consideration. Sokol's letter identified three separate
benefit enhancement proposals, two of which included the addition of the retirement
window to allow Respondent to retire on or before December 31, 2014.
The Supervisors, including Respondent, passed an ordinance to accept the
amendments to the Plan, including reduction of normal retirement age to 62, reduction of
early retirement age to 60, addition of a five -year vesting period, and inclusion of an early
retirement window as proposed.
To effectuate the changes, at the Township's regularly scheduled November 10,
2014, legislative meeting, Respondent motioned, seconded by Supervisor Laura Hough,
for the Township Solicitor to prepare the General Employee s Joiner [sic] for the Plan.
(The minutes inaccurately reflect the motion being made in relation to the Solicitor's
preparation of a "Joiner instead of an Ordinance adopting the amended Joinder
Agreement) The motion passed via unanimous 3 -0 vote. At the Township's regularly
scheduled December 8, 2014, legislative meeting, Respondent made the motion and voted
to accept Ordinance 2014.3 approving the revisions to the General Employee's Joinder
Pension Fund. The motion passed via 3 -0 unanimous vote. Ordinance 2014 -3 bears the
signatures of all three Township Supervisors, including Respondent.
Subsequently, Respondent retired effective January 1, 2015. Respondent's
average monthly compensation figure and years of service were utilized to calculate
Respondents monthly benefit calculation of $160.47. Respondent elected to receive a
monthly benefit payable in the amount of $160.47 for life with payments to cease upon
death. Respondent's effective benefit date was January 1, 2015.
Absent the approval of Township Ordinance No. 2014 -3, authorizing changes in the
Township Joinder Agreement, Respondent would not have been eligible to receive a
monthly pension upon his December 31, 2014, retirement from Township employment.
Without the inclusion of a five -year vesting period within the Township Joinder Agreement,
Respondent would only have been eligible to receive his employee contributions plus any
accrued interest at the time of his retirement. Without the inclusion of an early retirement
window within the Plan Joinder Agreement, Respondent would not have been eligible to
receive pension payments upon his December 31, 2014, retirement.
The parties have stipulated that as a result of Respondent's participation in
discussions and meetings as a Township Supervisor regarding the amending of the Plan to
include an "early retirement window," which allowed any Plan particippant who was 59 years
old, with five ears of service who terminated employment with the Townshi on or before
December 31, 2014, to have a monthly benefit commencing January 1, 2015 (for which
only he met the eligibility requirement at that time); and his actions in voting to approve and
signing Township Ordinance No. 2014 -3, which authorized said chan-9es to the Plan
Joinder
resenting the pension checks kss recei received
d from January 5, 2015, through Sept of mb'er 2016.
representing
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:
That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public
Official and Em loyee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S.
Section 1103(a�- occurred when Podoskey
Podroskey., 16 -041
Page
motioned and voted to accept Ordinance No.
2014 -3, approving revisions to the General
Employee's Joinder Pension Fund, which
resulted in Podroskey receiving a private
pecuniary benefit in that he received full pension
benefits under the "early retirement window"
which allowed any plan participant who was 59
years old, with five years of service who
terminated employment with the Township on or
before December 31, 2014 to have a monthly
benefit commencing January 1, 2015 (for which
only he met the eligibility requirement at that
time).
The Investigative Division has conducted a
comprehensive investigation and review of the
allegations as contained in ... paragraph two (2)
[of the Consent Agreement]. After said
investigation and review, the Investigative
Division has elected to not pursue there maining
allegations. The Investigative Division and
Respondent have agreed to submit the instant
Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings
in settlement of the matter.
4. Podroskey agrees to make payment in the amount of
$1,943.23 in settlement of this matter.
Podroskey agrees to make a payment of
$1,443.23 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.
Podroskey 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 thirt (30) days of the
issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Podroskey agrees to file complete and accurate Statements of
Financial Interests with West Pike Run Township through the
State Ethics Commission, for the 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, and
2015 calendar years within thirty (30) days of the issuance of
the final adjudication in this matter.
Podroskey agrees to not accept any reimbursement,
compensation or other payment from West Pike Run Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid
in settlement of this matter.
a. As part of this Consent Agreement, Respondent
will not be required to forgo or divest any future
disbursements received under the pension plan.
PodroskO , 16 -041
V
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 matter. Such, however, does not
prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate
enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's allure to
comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or
cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to
review this matter further.
Consent Agreement, at 1 -3.
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(a), occurred when Respondent
motioned and voted to accept Ordinance No. 2014 -3, approving revisions to the Township
General Employee's Joinder Pension Fund, which resulted in Respondent receiving a
private pecuniary benefit in that he received full pension benefits under the aforesaid "early
retirement window" for which only he was eligible.
Because Respondent did not qualify for a pension under the Plan that existed in
earlyy summer 2014, changes were made to enable Respondent to get a full pension at age
59 through a retirement window tailored to meet his specific situation. Respondent actively
participated in changing the Township Joinder Agreement to benefit himself through the
inclusion of the early retirement window for which only he was eligible. With such
changes to the Township Joinder Agreement, Respondent would only have been eligible to
receive his own contributions to the Plan plus any accrued interest at the time of his
January 31, 2014, retirement. With the changes to the Township Joinder Agreement,
Respondent instead received a pecuniary benefit consisting of a monthly benefit in the
amount of $160.47 for life effective January 1, 2015. The parties have stipulated that
Respondent received a private ppecuniary benefit of $1,443.23, representing the pension
checks received from January 5, 2015, through September 2016.
With each element of a violation of Section 1103(a) established, we hold that a
violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when
Respondent motioned and voted to accept Ordinance No. 2014 -3, approving revisions to
the Township General Employee's Joinder Pension Fund, which resulted in Respondent
receiving a private pecuniary benefit m that he received full pension benefits under the
"early retirement window" which allowed any Plan participant who was 59 years old, with on or before
five years of service who terminated eefplOOmmenc n {hJanua Township 1 201 (forwhi h only
December 31, 2014 to have a monthly ben g January
he met the eligibility requirement at that time).
As part of the Consent Agreement, Respondent has agreed to make payment in the
total amount of $1,943.23 in settlement of this matter as follows. Respondent has agreed
to make payment in the amount of $1,443.23 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. Respondent 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. Respondent has further agreed to not
accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Township
representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter.
Finally, Respondent has agreed to file complete and accurate SFIs for calendar years
20111 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 with the Township, through this Commission, within
thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter.
Podroske , 16 -041
age
As part of the Consent Agreement, the parties have agreed that Respondent will not
be required to forgo or divest any future disbursements received under the Plan.
We agree that the aforesaid recommendations are appropriate, including the
recommendation that Podroskey file complete and accurate SFIs for calendar years 2011,
2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 notwithstanding the nol pros as to the Section 1104(a),
1104(d), 1105(a), and 1105(b) allegations.
Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent Podroskey is
directed to make payment in the amount of $1,443.23 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, Podroskey 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 investi ation 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, Podroskey 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.
Podroskey will not be required to forgo or divest any future disbursements received
under the Plan.
To the extent he has not already done so, Podroskey is directed to file complete and
accurate SFIs for the 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015 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 West Pike Run Township ( "Township "), Washington County,
from January 4 2010, through the present Phillip P. Podroskey ( "Podroskey ") 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. Podroskey violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when
Podroskey motioned and voted to accept Ordinance No. 2014 -3, approving
revisions to the Township General Employee's Joinder Pension Fund, which
resulted in Podroskey receiving a private pecuniary benefit in that he received full
pension benefits under the "early retirement window" which allowed any Plan
participant who was 59 years old, with five years of service who terminated
employment with the Township on or before December 31, 2014 to have a monthly
benefit commencing January 1, 2015 (for which only he met the eligibility
requirement at that time).
In Re: Phillip P. Podroskey, File Docket: 16.041
Respondent Date Decided: 1131118
Date Mailed: 215118
ORDER NO. 1727
1. As a Supervisor for West Pike Run Township ( "Township "), Washington County,
Phillip P. Podroskey ( "Podroskey ") violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official
and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when Podroskey
motioned and voted to accept Ordinance No. 2014 -3, approving revisions to the
Township General Employee's Joinder Pension Fund, which resulted in Podroskey
receiving a private pecuniary benefit in that he received full pension benefits under
the "early retirement window" which allowed any Plan participant who was 59 years
old, with five years of service who terminated employment with the Township on or
before December 31, 2014 to have a monthly benefit commencing January 1, 2015
(for which only he met the eligibility requirement at that time).
2. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Podroskey is directed to make payment
in the amount of 51,443.23 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.
3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Podroskey 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.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Podroskey 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.
a. Podroskey will not be required to forgo or divest any future disbursements
received under the Township General Employees Pension Plan.
5. To the extent he has not already done so, Podroskey is directed to file complete
and accurate Statements of Financial Interests for the 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and
2015 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.
6. Compliance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 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,
1 %'54