HomeMy WebLinkAbout901 SicklesIn Re: Janet E. Sickles
•
•
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
File Docket: 92- 055 -C2
Date Decided: 9/28/93
Date Mailed: 10/07/93
Before: James M. Howley, Chair
Daneen E. Reese, Vice Chair
Dennis C. Harrington
Roy W. Wilt
Austin M. Lee
Joseph W. Marshall, III
The State Ethics Commission received a complaint regarding a
possible violation of the State Ethics Act, Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S.
5401 et sea. Written notice, of the specific allegation(s) was
served at the commencement of the investigation. A Findings Report
was issued and served, upon completion of the investigation, which
constituted the Complaint by the Investigation Division. An Answer
was filed and a hearing was deemed waived. The record is complete.
This adjudication of the Commission is hereby issued which sets
forth the individual Allegations, Findings of Fact, Discussion,
Conclusions of Law and Order.
This adjudication is final and will be made available as a
public document fifteen days after issuance. However,
reconsideration may be requested which will defer public release of
this adjudication pending action on the request by the Commission.
A request for reconsideration, however, does not affect the
finality of this adjudication. A reconsideration request must be
received at this Commission within fifteen days of issuance and
must include a detailed explanation of the reasons as to why
reconsideration should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code
S21.29(b).
The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance
with Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. §408(h) during the fifteen day period
and no one unless the right to challenge this Order is waived, may
violate confidentiality by releasing, discussing or circulating
this Order. However, confidentiality does not preclude discussing
this case with an attorney at law.
Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Act is
guilty of a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not more than $1,000
or imprisonment for not more than one year, 65 P.S. §409(e).
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
That Janet Sickles, the former Food Service Director the for
orbli
Armstrong School District, violated provisions
official and employees Ethics Act (Act 9, of 1989), when she used
the authority of her office or employment to obtain gifts and
articles of monetary value in the form of promotional items for her
personal . use failed led vendors
report the a gifts with
on Statements of strict;
and when she
Financial Interest.
Section 3. Restricted Activities:
(a) No public official or public
employee shall engage in conduct that
constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 P.S.
§403(a).
Section 2. Definitions
"Conflict" or conflict of interest."
Use by a public official or public employee of
the authority of his office or employment or
any confidential information received through
his holding public office or employment for
the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a
member of his immediate family or a business
with which he or a member of immediate family
is associated. "Conflict" or "conflict of
interest" 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. P.S.
S402.
Section 3. Restricted Activities
Subsection lc):
No public official, public employee or
nominee or candidate for public office shall
solicit or accept, anything of monetary value,
including a gift, loan, political
contribution, reward or promise future
employment based on any understanding of that
public official, public employee, or nominee
Sickles, 92- 055-C2
Page 3
that the vote, official action, or judgement
of the public official, or public employee, or
nominee, or candidate for public office would
be influenced thereby. 65. P.S. 5403(c).
Section 5. Statements.of Financial Interests
Subsection (b):
The statement shall include the following
information for the prior calendar year with
regard to the person required to file a
statement.
(6) The name and address of the
source and the amount of any gift or
gifts valued in the aggregate of
$200.00 or more, and the
circumstances for each gift. This
paragraph shall not apply to a gift
or gifts received from a spouse,
parent, parent by marriage, sibling,
child, grandchild, other family
member or friend when the
circumstances make it clear that the
motivation for the action was a
personal or family relationship.
However, for the purpose of this
subsection, the term "friend" shall
not include a registered lobbyist or
an employee of a registered
lobbyist. This paragraph shall not
be applied retroactively. 65. P. S.
§405(b).
II. FINDINGS:
1. Janet Sickles was employed as Food Service Director for the
Armstrong School District from January, 1990, through June,
1991.
a. Sickles was employed as District Director of Financial
Affairs from July, 1991, through April, 1993.
(1) Sickles was Acting Director of Business Affairs
between July 1, 1991 and September 1991.
2. Typical duties for, the position of Food Service Director for
the Armstrong School District as detailed by job description
for that position includes the following:
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 4
a. Coordinate financial aspects of Food Service; budgeting
and reporting.
b. Coordinate support personnel in negotiations and
grievance matters.
c. Supervise Workmen's Compensation.
d. Supervise Unemployment Compensation.
e. Coordinate federal programs reporting.
f. Coordinate special grants.
g. Serve as budget liaison between Director of Business
Affairs and Support Services.
h. Develop overall knowledge and competence in all areas of
business affairs.
i. Supervise support staff district -wide.
j. Develop and implement a system of evaluation for
cafeteria employees.
3. Additional duties of the Food Service Director not specified
in the job description include:
a. Primary responsibility for vendor selection.
b. Responsibility for overseeing the bid process for food
services.
c. Oversee the purchase of food and related supplies for the
district's schools.
d. The Food Service Director had other duties such as the
development of a five week cycle menu, monthly manager
meetings, review of manager's order sheets and membership
in the negotiating team for Food Service employees.
4. Armstrong School District records Sickles include
was list of food
service purveyors utilized while _
Director. The suppliers were organized into groups reguls
distributors and suppliers of paper products, produce,
breads, and ice creams as follows:
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 5
a. Primary distributors:
Jeannette Food Service
Sky Brothers
Parkway Food Service
W. S. Lee
b. Paper
D & J Distributors
d.
e.
f.
c. Produce
Moorhead's Produce
Dentici Produce
Gray's Country Market
Stockdale's Store
Friendship Produce
5. Disbursements made from the district's
while Sickles was Food Service Director
disbursements to the following entities
a. School vear: 1989 - 90
Armstrong School District
Jeannette Food Service -
Dairy Dell -
Dean Dairy Products. -
Dentici Wholesale Produce
Dairy Land Sales -
Parkway Foods -
W. E. Lee & Sons -
65 suppliers less than $6,000.00 each.
b. School vear: 1990 - 91
Armstrong School District
Parkway Foods -
Jeannette Food Service
Dairy Dell -
Dean Dairy Products
Turner Dairy -
Rinehold Ice Cream
Stroehman Brothers
Dentici Produce -
Gourley Packing -
Lance, Inc. -
Louis Brothers -
Nardone Bros -
W. S. Lee & Sons -
61 providers under $5,000.00
h.
Meats
Courley Packaging
Bread
Stroehman Bakery
Ice Cream
Rinehold Ice Cream
Milk
Three vendors
Utensils /Supplies
Lewis Brothers
food service account
included significant
$ 538,197.00
$ 461,861.26
$ 112,713.82
$ 75,999.48
$ 16,096.35
$ 6,690.00
none
none
$ 521,269.04
$ 230,683.02
$ 72,961.44
$ 66,038.40
$ 58,707.10
$ 50,621.43
$ 42,248.86
$ 32,305.28
$ 17,355.00
$ 17,054.96
$ 10,331.87
$ 6,542.40
$ 5,824.00
None
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 6
c. School year: 1991 - 92
Armstrong School District - $ 691,084.15
Parkway Foods - 167,549.07
Lee Distributors - 119,922.36
69,922.3
Dairy Dell - 52,811.84
Turner Dairy - 51,118.61
3 ,0
J. P. Food Service - 51
Stroehman Brothers - 40.59
30,
Dean Dairy -
Kromers Dairy - 25,299.67
Gourley Packing - .40
Reinhold Ice Cream - 18,319.04
Lance Inc. - 15,469.98
D & J Distributors - 15,5,4469.98
Dentici - - 7,629.57
Waldmans Meats 5,62 7,6299
Jeannette Food Service -
67 providers under $5,000.00
d. Sickles offers the following commentary as to Findings
5.a. through c.
(1) In the 1989 -1990 year, she found discrepancies,
unauthorized shipments, substitutions and higher
prices by Jeannette Food Service so that she
pursued other purveyors to service the district.
(2) In the 1990 -1991 year, Sickles met with Parkway
Foods to obtain a main purveyor which would be
competitive in pricing, delivery and quality;
thereafter new purveyors were added.
In the 1991 -1992 year, Sickles relinquished
authority for food service purchasing in December
1991.
6. The primary distributors utilized by Sickles during her tenure
as Food Service Director provided gifts or promotional items
to her and /or the school district.
a. Companies that provided gifts or promotional items saw an
increase in business with the district after Sickles
became Food Service Director.
(1) Sickles asserts that purveyors were selected for
pricing, delivery and quality.
(3)
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 7
7. It is a food industry accepted practice to provide gifts or
promotional items as incentives for purchases to be made from
a specific company.
8. Companies which provided the Armstrong School District with
gifts or promotional items while Sickles was employed as Food
Service Director include:
a. Parkway Food Service
b. Tyson Foods
c. W. S. Lee Foods
d. Tony's Pizza
e. Vlasic
(1) Sickles states that she never met or spoke to a
Vlasic representative.
9. Parkway Foods was dealing with the district for less than one
month when Sickles won a camcorder in October, 1990. (Refer
to Finding #17).
a. Parkway Foods was the district's number one supplier for
both the 1990 -91 school year and 1991 -1992 school year.
b. Parkway Foods did not have any dealings with the district
during the previous school year.
c. Sickles comments that several months of negotiating
preceded Parkway Foods first shipment.
10. W. S. Lee Foods had no dealings with the school district prior
to 1991.
a. Sickles received a wicker set as a result of purchases
she made at the W.S. Lee Foods Show in 1991. (Refer to
Findings #27 - #28).
b. W. S. Lee Foods became the district's second largest
supplier for the 1991 -92 school year.
c. Sickles states that W.S. Lee Foods obtained business
based on competitive pricing, satisfactory delivery and
quality products.
11. By the end of the 1991 - 92 school year, Parkway Foods and W.
S. Lee Foods were the district's top two suppliers. (Refer to
Finding #5).
12. Jeannette Foods was the primary supplier of food products to
the Armstrong School District prior to Sickles's employment as
Food Service Director.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 8
13. Jeannette Foods sales decreased during Sickles tenure as Food
Service Director as fo
a. School year:
89 - 90
90 - 91
91 - 92
14. Jeannette Food Service is not known
or promotional items to Sickles.
15. The Food Service Director for the
attends food service shows as
district.
$461,861.26
72,961.4
5,671.55
to have provided any gifts
Armstrong School District
a representative of the
a. Expenses are reimbursed by the district.
b. Shows are generally not open to the public.
c. Some shows are exclusive to school district food service
directors and related personnel.
16. A. Food Service Association Show (PSFSA).
Pennsylvania School Food Service
Springs Resort during
a. This show was held at Seven
October, 1990.
17. Parkway Food Service had a booth at the 1990 PSFSA Show.
a. They had a chance drawing for a camcorder.
b. The camcorder was supplied to Parkway Foods as a
promotional item from one of their suppliers
c. The approximate retail value was $1,000.00.
Sickles name was drawn and she received the camcorder.
d.
e. Sickles retained the camcorder for her personal use.
(1) Sickles denies the above and asserts that she
informed the superintendent about the camcorder and
he replied that she won it and that she should not
leave it in the building; that the camcorder was
used by board members to record sporting events and
that following termination of her contract a
proviso notes that the camcorder which was packed
in its original carton will be returned if a
violation of the Ethics Law is found.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 9
18. The Armstrong School District started dealing with Parkway
Foods on October 1, 1990.
a. Parkway Foods was the district's primary supplier during
the 1990 -91 school year. (Reference Finding #5).
19. Parkway Food Service had a promotion enabling school districts
to earn IBM Compatible Personal Computers at no cost. During
the 1991 -92 school year, Parkway Foods provided fourteen
computers and four printers to school districts.
a. The approximate value of each computer was $1300.00.
b. A computer would be provided for each $75,000.00 in
purchases from Parkway Foods between 8/10/91 and 5/21/92.
c. Printers could be obtained for an additional $35,000.00
in purchases, after the initial $75,000.00.
d. This promotion was only available to school districts.
20. Computers were intended to be used by the school district they
were provided to for inventory control and menu preparation.
Sickles denies the foregoing and states that any equipment
which is property of the district is used in any area deemed
appropriate.
a. They were not intended as gifts for the district's food
service directors.
b. They were not intended for the personal use of the food
service director.
c. Parkway Foods offers a software package known as Answers,
which assists with inventory control, menu preparation
and costing.
21. The Armstrong District purchased enough food from Parkway
Service to qualify for two computers.
a. The first computer was delivered around January, 1992.
The second computer was delivered around October or
November, 1992.
22. Sickles took the first computer home to her residence.
a. The computer remained there until July 6, 1992.
b. Former Superintendent, William Jones, authorized Sickles
to take a computer home to use on district business.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 10
(1) Sickles notes that this was done because the school
board would not grant her permission to work
evenings in the district offices.
c. Sickles was to use it for budget preparation.
d. Her tentative budget was due by May, 1992.
e. Sickles returned it two weeks after being interviewed
regarding interview boccurredtoneJune 23 Auditor
office. 1992
(1) Sickles
states retained
because
30, 1992.
23. On May 14, 1 Annual Food Show 1991, the Jaffa W. S. Lee
& Sons, 1991 Jaffa Mosque,A7.toona,
PA.
a. Invitations were sent out to food service facilities.
(1) Sickles notes that her invitation came from Babs
Gurscik.
b. Show catalogs were provided listing expected vendors and
show prices.
The show was not open to the general public.
Sickles attended the show as a representative of the
Armstrong School District.
e. Sickles had the Authority to make purchases on behalf of
the district.
24. Sickles was provided with a show catalog when she arrived at
the show.
a. Included as part of the show catalog was an introduction
and instruction sheet. The introduction provided the
following description of points that could be earned and
used for gifts.
"Premium points - all orders placed at the show will
receive premium points. These points may be used for
gift certificates for the prizes on display at the prize
booth. You must visit the booth if you are placing an
order to have your premium points totaled by the booth
and initialed, so they will be valid."
d.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 11
"Pricing - you will see the prices listed after each
item. The price you pay for each item will be determined
by the total cases you purchase of all items at the show.
Partial case pricing will be slightly higher than show
pricing, so order full cases where possible."
"Ordering - you may order products and receive delivery
for up to five weeks at the show price.
Delivery - weeks will be as follows: (Week one, June 3),
(Week two, June 10), (Week 3, June 17), (Week four, June
24), (Week 5, July 1)."
To win a trip - with this year's theme being "The Great
Outdoors ", certain booths will be offering chances to win
a trip. If a booth is offering a trip, it is noted at
the top of that booth's page. Please stop at the booth
to find out the details on registration for a chance to
win. Win one trip per customer. Drawings will be held
after the show. Note: Trip tickets will be verified
after merchandise has been delivered and payment
received. W. S. Lee reserves the right to qualify all
trip winners ".
b. Also provided with the catalog was an instruction sheet.
The instruction sheet has the following directions for
the show.
Step 1 - Register upstairs in the Jaffa Mosque, you
will receive tags, bags, etc., here.
Step 2 Put case quantities under column labeled CS,
under the week you want delivery. Partial
cases may be ordered by placing quantities
under the column labeled BC under the
appropriate week. Remember to visit each
booth to have your points totaled and
initialed.
Step 3 - You may order and receive points for items not
in the Show Book. A list of W. S. Lee stock
items is available from each manufacturer at
each booth. The manufacturer representative
will be happy to assist.
Step 4 - When you are finished touring the show, your
book and any additional order forms are to be
turned in to the order booths upstairs where
your orders will be processed.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C
Page 12
You will receive a copy of your order for
verification as well as a certificate of your
point totals.
Your point certificate may then be spent at
the J. C. Penney or Radio Shack booths; or as
credit off your account. (Note: Any left-
over points will be issued as a gift
certificate).
25. At the Lee Food Show, Sickles purchased food items on behalf
of the school district. Each item purchased had a bonus point
attached to it.
a. Sickles earned 30,850 bonus points for purchases she made
at the show.
b. Each point is equal to one cent on the dollar.
26. Sickles earned $308.50 credit for purchases she made for the
school district.
a. This could ha er been
Findingd #24(b)�6�b�rict's account as
credit. (Refer
Sickles used the $308.50 credit to purchase a wicker set for
herself instead of applying it to the district's account.
28.: Sickles selected a' three piece wicker set from a booth
operated by J. C. Penney Company. Penneys was one of the
providers of gifts for points earned. Wicker items from
Penneys included:
a. Chaise lounge
Rocker
End table
Retail total
b. Sickles applied
unpaid balance
Sons. Lee & Sons c. W
art of an arrangement e they had with J. C. Penneys as
Penneys
part
W. S. Lee
ed to Sickles' residence, dence,1 set
delivered 270 N. Water Street,
Kittanning, PA 16201.
Step 5 -
Step 6 -
$199.99
$ 84.99
$ 59.99
$344.97
the $308.50 credit to the purchase. The
of $36.40 was absorbed by W. S. Lee &
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 13
29. W. S. Lee Foods did not have any dealings with the district,
while Sickles served as Food Service Director prior to this
show.
a. Sickles states that prior to her attendance at the show,
she had never been contacted by W.S. Lee for the
solicitation of business or by invitation for their show.
30. Sickles was not advised that she could not accept gifts or
promotional items from companies dealing with the district.
a. Promotional items received by the food department were
often distributed to the district schools. These were
used as prizes to promote student participation in the
school lunch program.
b. Former Superintendent William Jones endorsed the use of
gifts in this manner.
31. The Armstrong School District did not have any policy for its
employees on the acceptance of gifts or promotional items
during this period.
a. As a result of a review in the matter by the State
Auditor Generals Office and the State Ethics Commission,
the following resolution was passed at the School Boards
November 23, 1992, meeting:
"Resolved that the Board adopt a policy statement under
Personnel- Series 4000, page 4900, prohibiting acceptance
of gifts, loans, political contributions, rewards or
promises of future employment by the district
personnel /board members, except in special cases as
authorized by the superintendent or his designee, based
on any understanding of that .public official /public
employee that the vote, official action, or judgement of
the public official /public employee would be influenced
thereby."
32. Janet Sickles filed Statements of Financial Interests with the
Armstrong School District as follows:
a. Calendar year: 1990
Filed: 4/30/91 on SEC Form 1/91
Position: Supervisor, School Food Service
Creditors: None
Direct /Indirect Income: Armstrong School District
Gifts: None
All other financial interests: None
Sickles,
Page 14
b.
Calendar year: 1991
Filed: 6/4/92 on SEC Form 1/92
Position: Director of Business Affairs
Creditors: None
Direct /Indirect Income: Armstrong School District
Gifts: None
All other financial interests: None
Calendar year: 1992
Filed: 7/1/93 on SEC Form 1/93
Position: Director of Finance
Creditors: None
Direct /Indirect Income: Armstrong School District
Gifts: None
All other Financial Interest: None
d. Sickles offers the following commentary as to the above
finding.
(1) The failuure of report
knowledge. acceptance of gifts was
due to her
(2) The school district never communicated the need for
full disclosure.
During her employment, the Statement of Financial
Interests (FIS) was received in completed form with
a request for signature and return to the
secretary.
c.
92- 055 -C
(
III. DISCUSSION:
As the former Food Service Director for the Armsstron School
hlil
District, Janet E. Sickles, hereinafter Sickles,
employee as that term is defined under Act 9 of 1989.
65 P.S.
§402. As such, her conduct ein -are app provisions cable to her.
Ethics Law and the restrictions the
Initially, it is noted that Section 9 of Act 9 of June 26,
1989 provides, in part, as follows:
This amendatory act shall not apply
to
violations committed prior to the effective
date of this act, and causes of action
initiated for such violations shall be
governed by the prior law, which is continued
in effect for that purpose as if this act were
not in force. For the purposes of this
section, a violation was committed prior to
the effective date of this act if any elements
of the violation occurred prior thereto.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 15
Since the occurrences in this case transpired after the
effective date of Act 9 (June 26, 1989), we must apply the
provisions of Act 9 to determine whether the Ethics Act was
violated.
Under Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 quoted above, a public
official /employee shall not engage in conduct that constitutes a
conflict of interest, that is, he may not use the authority of the
office or confidential information to obtain a private pecuniary for himself, a member of his immediate family or the
business with which he or a member of his immediate family is
associated.
Section 3(c) of Act 9 of 1989 provides in part that no public
official /employee shall solicit or accept anything of monetary
value based upon any understanding that the vote, official action
or judgement of the public official /employee would be influenced
thereby.
Section 5(b)(6) of the Ethics Law requires that each public
official /employee must list on the Statement of Financial Interests
(PIS) the name and address of the source and the amount of any
valued in the aggregate of $200 or more together with the
circumstances of each gift.
The issues before us are whether Sickles violated either
Section 3(a) or 3(c) of Act 9 of 1989 quoted above regarding the
allegations that she used the authority of her office to obtain
gifts or articles of monetary value from vendors which she selected
to do business with the Armstrong School District (District) or did
so based upon an understanding that influenced her official action
on judgment and second that she failed to report the gifts on her
Financial Interests Statements (FIS's).
Factually, Sickles was employed as Food Service Director for
the District from January, 1990, through June 1991, and was
District Director of Financial Affairs from July, 1991, through
April, 1993. One of the duties of Sickles as Food Service Director
involved the selection of vendors and oversight of the bid process
for food services and related supplies for the District. When
Sickles assumed the responsibility for vendor selection, Jeannette
Food Service was the primary distributor for the District. A
listing of all vendors for the District as well as the amounts of
expenditures for these vendors over a three year period is set
forth in Fact Findings 4 and 5. Shortly after Sickles assumed the
responsibility of choosing the vendors, she switched from Jeannette
to Parkway Foods as the primary supplier for the District. Sickles
asserts that she made the switch because of problems with Jeannette
and because Parkway Foods was more competitive in terms of pricing,
delivery and quality. However, the record does reflect that
Jeannette Foods did not provide any gifts or promotional items to
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 16
Sickles whereas Parkway Foods, approximately one month after it
began supplying the District, advised Sickles at a food service
show that she won a camcorder.
Although it is an accepted food industry practice to provide
gifts or promotional items as incentives for purchases, the vendors
utilized by Sickles during her tenure as Food Service Director,
which provided such gifts or promotional items, saw an increase in
business with the District.
In particular, Sickles received articles of monetary value
from W.S. Lee Foods, which had no dealings with the District prior
to 1991. That vendor became the District's second largest supplier
in a result 992. Sickles of purchases she made e at� that e show for the District,
as a res
she received a set of wicker furniture.
One of the functions of a Food Service Director is to attend
Food Service Shows as a representative of the District. These
shows are generally not open to the public and are exclusive to
school district foods service directors and related personnel. As
Food Service Director, Sickles attended the 1990 Pennsylvania
School Food Service Association Show wherein Parkway Food Service
had a booth. As noted above, 'Parkway conducted a chance drawing
for a camcorder valued at approximately $1,000.00 which was
received from one of its suppliers. Sickles' name was drawn and
she received the camcorder for personal use. Sickles asserts that
when she won the camcorder, she discussed the matter with the
superintendent who purportedly advised her that because she won it,
she should not leave it in the building. It was during this same
time that the District started 'dealing with Parkway Foods which,
became the primary supplier for the District during the 1990 -91
school year.
Another Parkway promotion was to provide the District with a
computer or printer after a certain amount of purchases was made by
the District from Parkway. Through such purchases, the District
received one computer in January 1992 and a second in the Fall of
1992. Sickles took the first computer to her residence which
remained there until July '6, 1992. Sickles did receive
authorization from the superintendent to take the computer home to
use on District business. Sickles did not return the computer
until approximately two weeks after she was interviewed by the
State Auditor General's Office concerning the computer. Sickles
states that she retained the computer because she wanted to wait
until the final school budget was adopted on June 30, 1992
In May 1991, Sickles also attended the W.S. Lee and Sons 1991
Annual Food Show as a representative of the District. When Sickles
arrived at the show, she was provided with a show atalo would i c h
noted that as to all placed orders, "premium points"
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 17
accumulated which could be then used to receive gifts. Sickles did
purchase food items on behalf of the District and earned 30,850
bonus points. Since each point had an equivalency of $.01,
Sickles earned $308.50 in credit for the purchases she made on
behalf of the District. Instead of applying the $308.50 credit to
the District's account, Sickles used the credit for personal use by
purchasing a three piece wicker set from a booth operated by J.C.
Penney Company which retailed at $344.97. Since Sickles was short
by $36.40 as to the purchase price, that difference was absorbed by
W.S. Lee and Sons. W.S. Lee and Sons arranged for the wicker set
to be delivered to Sickles personal residence. Although W.S. Lee
and Sons had no prior dealings with the District before Sickles
attended the show, this vendor thereafter became a main supplier
for the District.
Sickles was never advised that she could not accept gifts or
promotional items and the superintendent endorsed the use of gifts
in this manner. Although the District did not have any prior
policy for its employees on the acceptance of gifts or promotional
items, a resolution was adopted on November 23, 1992 which
prohibited such activity.
On the FIS's that Sickles filed for the calendar year 1990
through 1992, she listed none under the category of gifts. Sickles
however asserts that her failure to report the gifts was due to her
lack of knowledge and the failure of the school district to
communicate the need for full disclosure.
In applying the provisions of the Ethics Law to the above
facts, we find no violation of Section 3(a) or 3(c) of Act 9 of
1989 regarding the receipt of the camcorder. Although there was a
use of authority of office by Sickles in selecting Parkway as a
District vendor, the receipt of the camcorder by Sickles was the
result of a chance drawing. Because we do not find a linkage
between the use of authority of office and the private pecuniary
benefit, we find no violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 as to the
receipt of the camcorder.
As to the receipt of the wicker furniture by Sickles, we find
a - violation of Section 3(a) but not 3(c). As to Section 3(a) of
Act 9 of 1989, there was a use of authority of office on the part
of Sickles in that she as Food Service Director had the authority
to select vendors to supply the District for food and related
services. Thus, it was Sickles' decision to select W.S. Lee and
Sons as a vendor from which she received points that enabled her to
purchase the wicker furniture. Such was clearly a use of authority
of office. Juliante, Order 809. The receipt of the wicker
furniture valued at $344.97 was clearly private pecuniary benefit
to Sickles. Lastly, such private pecuniary benefit inured directly
to Sickles in that she used the furniture for personal use. Her
action is particularly disconcerting in that she could have applied
Sickles, 92- 055 -C
Page 18
the $344.97 as a credit to the fDsrsttri t but failed to do so
and instead used the credit personal use.
This Commission has considered a matter similar to the above
in Stefanko, Opinion 90 -015, wherein we held that school directors
and certain employees who accumulated frequent flyer credits in
connection with official travel paid by the school district were
required to use those frequent flyer credits for official travel
only. Conversely, we concluded that the utilization of such
frequent flyer credits for personal travel was prohibited as a
private pecuniary benefit obtained through the use of authority of
office under the Ethics Law.
We are not swayed by Sickle's argument that she was not
advised that she could not accept such gifts or promotional items.
Even if Sickles were unaware of the Ethics Law, which she is
presumed to know under the law, a modicum of common sense should
have guided Sickles to the realization that she was in an absolute
conflict of interest situation when she attended a food service
vendor show and received a wicker furniture set from a vendor which
she selected as a District supplier.
Section 7(13) of Act 9 of 1989 provides in part: "Any order
resulting from a finding that a public official or public employee
has obtained a financial gain in violation of this Act may require
the restitution plus interest of that gain to the appropriate
governmental body..." 65 P.S.407 (13).
In this particular case, given the Ethics Law, our prior
decisions and the facts of this case, we find that restitution is
appropriate. Accordingly, within thirty days of the date of
issuance of this order, Sickles is directed as to the wicker
furniture to make restitution to the District through this
Commission in the amount of $344.97.
As to Section 3(c), we find no violation because the - record
before us does not establish that the requisite "understanding"
existed between Sickles and the vendors vis -a -vis her selection of
said vendors and the receipt of gifts from those vendors. Hence, an
se undee andineviweenfind no violations such
of Section 3( ) of Act 9 of
understand g,
1989.
As to Section 5(b)(6) of the Ethics law, Sickles admits that
she did not list the camcorder or wicker furniture in the category
of gifts. Therefore, we find that Sickles violated Section 5(b)
(6) when she failed to list the camcorder on her calendar year 1990
FIS and failed to list the wicker furniture on her 1991 calendar
year FIS. Sickles is directed within thirty days of the date of
issuance of this Order to file amended FIS's for the 1990 and 1991
calendar years reporting those gifts. Failure to comply with
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 19
directive of this Commission to file amended FIS's or to make the
appropriate restitution will result in a directive of this
Commission to institute an order enforcement action.
Sickles, 92- 055 -C2
Page 20
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Janet Sickles as the former Food Service Director of the
Armstrong School District was a public employee subject to the
provisions of Act 9 of 1989.
2. Sickles violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when she used
the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for
herself consisting of a wicker Cumulated resulting she
from was
able to
purchase from points she District
purchases from W.S. Lee and Sons.
3. Sickles did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding
the receipt of a camcorder, by chance drawing, from a District
vendor, Parkway Foods.
4. Sickles did not violate Section 3(c) of Act 9 of 1989 in that
the evidence of record does not establish that an understanding
existed between Sickles and certain vendors relative to her choice
of those vendors to supply the Armstrong School District and the
action of those vendors to make gifts to Sickles.
5. Sickles violated Section 5(b)(6) of Act 9 of 1989 when she
failed to list a camcorder which she received from Parkway Foods as
a gift on her 1990 calendar year Financial Interest Statement and
when she failed
Sons on her
Lee �
ee to the
from W.S. L calendar year Financial Interest
Statement.
In Re: Janet E. Sickles : File Docket: 92- 055 -C2
Date Decided: 9/28/93
Date Mailed: 10/07/93
ORDER NO. 901
1. Janet Sickles as the former Food Service Director of the
Armstrong School District violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989
when she used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary
benefit for herself consisting of a wicker furniture set valued at
$344.97 which she was able to purchase from points she accumulated
resulting from District purchases from W.S. Lee and Sons.
2. Sickles did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding
the receipt of a camcorder, by chance drawing, from a District
vendor, Parkway Foods.
3. Sickles did not violate Section 3(c) of Act 9 of 1989 in that
the evidence of record does not establish that an understanding
existed between Sickles and certain vendors relative to her choice
of those vendors to supply the Armstrong School District and the
action of those vendors to make gifts to Sickles.
4. Sickles violated Section 5 (b) (6) of Act 9 of 1989 when she
failed to list a camcorder which she received from Parkway foods as
a gift on her 1990 calendar year Financial Interest Statement and
when she failed to list the wicker furniture set which she received
from W.S. Lee and Sons on her 1991 calendar year Financial Interest
Statement.
5. Sickles is directed within thirty (30) days of issuance of the
Order to file amended Financial Interest Statements for the 1990
and 1991 calendar years listing the gifts, the gift amounts, the
names and addresses of the sources of the gifts and the
circumstances surrounding the gifts.
6. Sickles is directed within thirty (30) days of issuance of this
Order to make restitution by making payment through this Commission
to the School District in the amount of $344.97 for the wicker
furniture received.
7. Failure by Sickles to comply with the provisions of Paragraphs
5 and 6 will result in a directive of this Commission to institute
an order enforcement action in Commonwealth Court.
BY THE COMMISSION,
//
JAMES M. HOWLEY, CHAIR