Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout909 RankSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FtNANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 In Re: Alan Rank File Docket: 92- 068 -C2 Date Decided: December 7, 1993 Date Mailed: December 10, 1993 Before: James M. Howley, Chair Daneen E. Reese, Vice Chair Dennis C. Harrington Roy W. Wilt Austin M. Lee Allan M. Kluger 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. §401 et seq. 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 waived. A consent agreement was submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration which was subsequently approved. 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 §21.29(b). The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. 5408(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. 5409(e). Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That Alan Rank, a Commissioner for South Fayette Township, Allegheny County, violated the following provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 9 of 1989), when he used the authority of his position to recommend the appointment of a financial consultant for the Township Police and Non - Uniform Pension Funds, and when the company where he served as a Vice President subcontracted with the financial consultant to perform pension investment services for the Police and Non - Uniform Pension Funds. Section 3. Restricted Activities: (a) No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. (f) No public official or public employee or his spouse or child or any business in which the person or his spouse or child is associated shall enter into any contract valued at $500.00 or more with the governmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated or any subcontract valued at $500.00 or more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body with which the public official or public employee is associated, unless the contract has been awarded through an open and public process, including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure of all proposals considered and contracts awarded. In such case, the public official or public employee shall not have any supervisory or overall responsibility for the implementation or administration of the contract. Any contract or subcontract made in violation of this subsection shall be voidable by a Court of Competent Jurisdiction if the suit is commenced within ninety days of the making of the contract or subcontract. 65 P.S. SS403(a), (f). II. FINDINGS: 1. Alan Rank has served as an elected South Fayette Township Commissioner since January 1986. a. Rank served as chairman of the five member board from January 1988 until December 1989. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 3 b. Rank served as Finance Chairman during 1990 and 1991. 2. The Township Board of Commissioners appoint a finance committee a. The chairman of this committee generally takes the lead in reviewing all financial aspects of the township's operation including pension plans. Rank was employed by Shearson Lehman Brothers, 2 PPG Place, Suite 250, Pittsburgh, PA 15222 prior to August 1993. a. Rank had been employed by Shearson Lehman Brothers since July 1977. b. Rank had the title of Vice President, Financial Consultant. c. As:.a financial consultant, Rank recommends the purchase of stocks and bonds and other investments to individuals and entities. d. As a result of a merger, Rank became employed by Smith Barney Shearson, Inc. His position is essentially unchanged. e. Rank listed the title vice - president on prior Statements of Financial Interests filed with the township. 4. South Fayette Township maintains pension plans for police and non - uniform (service) employees. These plans have been in effect since at least 1970. a. Until October of 1991, the pension funds were primarily invested in insurance policies, annuity policies and certificates of deposit. 5. During the period when Rank was chairman of the South Fayette Township Commission, there were extended contract negotiations with police and non- uniform service employees. a. This involvement in negotiations led Rank to consider a review of the pension plans for the police and non - uniformed employees. 6. Changes in the investment environment and a reduction in state contributions reduced the amount of returns the township was receiving on pension fund investments. a. Rank informally the need for a review with then commission chairman, William Duchess. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 4 b. Rank was considered by all other commissioners to be the most qualified to perform an investigation of pension plan alternatives because of his employment in the field. 7. On approximately November 10, 1990, Rank had begun to research alternative businesses and investments for the township's pension plans. a. Rank was Finance Chairman at this time. b. Rank did report back to the commissioners on various occasions regarding his progress. 8. Minutes from the South Fayette Township's Board of Commissioners November 10, 1990, meeting, reflect that Rank had advised the Board that he had started to look into pension plan alternatives. a. Rank stated that "he had talked to Scott Thompson and started investigating people Thompson referred him to who could provide certain services. He believed that it was something that had to be done for the Police and Service Employee Pension Plans. They were well- funded and solvent, but they are just technically not up -to -date. I am pursuing some things on this." 9. South Fayette Township received a proposal from the actuarial firm of Mockenhaupt, Mockenhaupt, Cowder and Parks, (MMC &P), on May 3, 1990, to update the township's Police and Non - Uniform Pension Plans. a. MMC &P was serving as the township actuary at this time. b. The commissioners reviewed this 'proposal on June 11, 1990, and such was accepted on March 11, 1991. 10. Minutes from the South Fayette Township Commissioners March 11, 1991, meeting, include discussion of, and official action on MMC &P's proposal to update the township's police and non- uniform pension plans. a. Minutes reflect: Secretary; Claudia Smelko, asked the Board whether they wanted to discuss a proposal received to up -date the Police /Service Employee Plans. Commissioner Duchess: Yes, we have had letters on that for some time. I talked with Alan (Rank) about this yesterday because he is the Finance Chairman, and he recommended we accept MMC &P's proposal, so that they can Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 5 get started on updating It was moved by Duchess and seconded by Terensky with all commissioners present voting aye to accept the proposals from MMC &P to update the police and service employees pension at $1,550.00, and $1800.00 respectively. Present: Rank, Gillespie, Duchess, Kachuriak, Terensky b. No other proposals were brought before the Board for consideration. 11. Minutes of the South Fayette Township Commissioners detail reports by Rank on the status of the pension plans updating as follows: April 22, 1991: "Commissioner Rank asked that we obtain a Status Report from MMC &P on the updating of our Police /Service Employees Pension Plan for the May Meeting ". Present: Rank, Duchess, Gillespie, Kachuriak, Terensky. b. May 13, 1991: Rank advised the Board as follows: "I met with Mr. Mockenhaupt, he was quite happy that we are continuing on. We got a lot accomplished on clarifying the status of the retariting of the service Employees /Police Pension Plans ". (Smelko to Rank), Alan, they sent us a checklist to complete asking for things like certain definitions, vesting schedules, etc. I will give this to you for completion. (Rank) , I would like to talk later about the funding for this year's pension, because we have a little bit of a problem with the changing of the state codes. After we complete the checklist Claudia (Smelko) gave me, we should be getting actual plan prototypes for these plans. I have also communicated with Standard Life. They are going to be getting in touch with us after we write them a letter. Scott Thompson requested a special meeting to discuss the Police /Service Employee Pension Plans. Rank advised that "at this time, it is a little premature until we get the language of the plans themselves. This should be put off until sometime in July. Present: Rank, Gillespie, Duchess, Kachuriak, Terensky. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 6 c. September 9, 1991: Correspondence from MMC &P to the township regarding the police pension plan update was noted. Rank advised the Board: "I attended a meeting with these fine fellows (MMC &P) in an attempt to update the police and also the service employees pension programs. I think we have a good start on the police plan. They did point out two possible conflicts, and I will continue to work with Mr. Dean Ross on this and turn it over to Tim (O'Reily), for his review before we take any action at the October meeting. Hopefully, we can also get the service employees plan taken care of before the October meeting and have time to approve both of these plans at that meeting... We have been in numerous discussions over the past year as to the rather deplorable state of our pension plans which haven't really been addressed for going on fifteen years as far as updating. We are in the process of having MMC &P revamp and amend the plans accordingly. Also, because of the state's recent budgetary problems and the cut backs as to what we've been reimbursed for the uniform and service employees plans, I have entered into discussions and talked with various firms as to advising us on a method of investing that would be more prudent and more profitable to the township than that currently being pursued. This is the type of business I do for a living. I used some of my connections to contact people to get some input. What we came up with was a proposal by Mid Atlantic Financial Management Group, who provide financial planning and investment advisory services. They have agreed to review our current plans investments and establish plan objectives and then give us guidelines and procedures, draft policy, indicate cost and propose various independent investment managers for portions of the plan assets. This would be done for a professional fee of $1,000.00 for the initial phase, and then $400.00 per quarter review. This would include an annual visitation and presentation in addition to the initial." It was moved by Duchess and seconded by Terensky, to enter into an agreement with Mid Atlantic Financial Management Group at an initial fee of $1,000.00 plus $400.00 quarterly to provide pension investment advice and other service as explained by Commissioner Rank above. Motion carried. Rank abstained. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 7 Present: Rank, Duchess, Terensky, Gillespie, Kachuriak. d. October 14, 1991: OLD BUSINESS Comm. Rank - We have received and reviewed the pension plans prepared by MMC &P for the police and service employees (non- union) and need resolutions to adopt them. The police had some questions, but I would like to make a recommendation that we adopt their resolution contingent upon any items being finalized. I don't want to hold up the whole process for another 30 days. I also have the service employees plan here and would like to review it with Tim, approving it contingent on he and I both agreeing on it. The next step is that they come back to us with the finalized plans, and then we have a hard copy to go by. It was moved by RANK and seconded by GILLESPIE with all commissioners present voting aye to adopt Resolution No. 25 -91 adopting the revised Police Pension Plan as prepared by MMC &P contingent upon finalization of certain items with the Police Department and to adopt Resolution N�. 26 -91 adopting the revised Service Employees Pension Plan as also prepared by MMC &P contingent on review and approval by Comm. Rank and the Township Solicitor. 12. The pension plan technical revisions were completed by November, 1991. a. None of the revisions actually affected in any substantial way the types of investments which could be made. b. As progress was made on the technical revisions, attention was turned to developing a system for investing the plan assets. 13. Commissioner Rank was interested in a three part structure. a. I. employment of an entity (hereinafter referred to as Plan Administrator) to review current plan assets, to establish plan objectives, to recommend guidelines and procedures, draft policy, indicate cost, and propose independent plan managers. II. hiring independent investment managers (hereinafter referred to as an investment manager). III. employment of an entity to hold all plan assets and execute trades as directed by the independent investment Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 8 managers (hereinafter an asset custodian). b. Each was to work independently of each other in order to insure objectivity. 14. Rank contacted companies and made inquiries regarding pension services they offered and fees involved. a. None of the other commissioners were involved in this process. 15. Rank solicited bids from as the Plan Administrator. and Mid Atlantic Capital to serve Rank contacted James Kintley and James Berquist of Mid Atlantic inquiring whether they would be interested in providing pension plan consulting services. a. Kintley is a partner and is in charge of the Assets Management Department. b. Berquist is a Senior Vice President responsible for bringing in perspective clients. 17. Berquist is an acquaintance of Rank. Both attended South Fayette High School. a. Berquist was employed by Shearson Lehman from approximately 1984 to 1987. b. Rank was also employed by Shearson Lehman at this time. 18. The Mid Atlantic Capital Group was contacted only to provide pension plan consulting services. a. Mid Atlantic's functions and s C custodian included the selection of p lan brokers a funds. 19. The Mid Atlantic Capital Group has the ability to provide investment services including: a. In -house trading of stocks and bonds. b. Asset management. c. Financial advice. d. Health care consulting. e. Investment banking. Ronk, 92- 068 -C2 Page 9 20. Commonwealth Security does not perform pension plan administration services and therefore never submitted a proposal to perform these services. 21. Mid Atlantic Capital quoted Rank a price of $1,000.00 upfront, and $400.00 per quarter, reporting fees. a. These are the same amounts accepted by the township commissioners at their September 9, 1991, meeting. 22. Mid Atlantic Capital Corporations proposal was the only one brought before the commissioners by Rank for consideration. 23. Commissioners voted to hire Mid Atlantic based on Rank's recommendation. 24. Shearson Lehman Brothers offers managed money services. 25. Berquist of Mid Atlantic Capital was familiar with the Managed Money Services offered by Shearson Lehman's Consulting Services Division. 26. The Mid Atlantic Capital Group is not affiliated with Shearson Lehman Brothers. a. They are two separate and distinct business entities. b. They do not have an exclusive business relationship. 27. Rank advised James Kintley of Mid Atlantic that if Shearson was selected he should use Dana Craig as the Account Representative. a. Craig is a Vice President, Financial Consultant with Shearson Lehman's Consulting Services Division, 2 PPG Place, Suite 250, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. 28. James Kintley of Mid Atlantic interviewed Dana Craig for the position of Account Manager for Shearson Lehman. a. Mid Atlantic had previous dealings with Craig at Shearson Lehman and was familiar with his job performance. b. No other people were interviewed for the position. 29. Mid Atlantic Capital hired Shearson Lehman to serve as the accounts money manager, and custodian of its funds. a. Dana Craig was hired as the Account Representative. b. Mid Atlantic hired Fidelity to manage short term assets. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 10 30. The other South Fayette Township Commissioner's took no official action regarding the hiring of Shearson Lehman to serve as the Plans Money Manager /Custodian. 31. Mid Atlantic Capital was responsible for selecting investment managers. a. Investment managers are identified to recommend stock and bond purchases. b. Managers are identified by their investment style: aggressive; conservative; or balanced. c. Mid Atlantic determines how much of the plans' assets should be placed in each area for the greatest yields with least risk. 32. The investment brokers each have a predetermined amount of the funds assets they are responsible for. a. Their allotments are based upon plan needs and new incoming monies. 33. Shearson Lehman does the actual purchasing of all stocks and bonds. a. They have custody of the accounts' assets. 34. Shearson Lehman, as manager of the accounts, receives commissions based on a percentage of the accounts assets. 35. Financial Consultants /Stockbrokers employed by Shearson Lehman work strictly on a commission basis. a. The Pittsburgh Branch Manager, Samuel Robb, is the only salaried employee excluding clerical personnel. b. No finders fees are paid. c. Agents generally do not share accounts. d. Special arrangements are made between agents who share accounts. e. Agents generally receive $.40 of every dollar in commission they generate. The remainder goes to Shearson Lehman for operating expenses and clerical personnel. 36. Both Alan Rank and Dana Craig work at Shearson Lehman's Pittsburgh Branch, 2 PPG Place, Suite 250, Pittsburgh, PA 15222. Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 11 a. Both work on approximately a 40 -60 commission. b. Both receive the benefit of the office space and clerical personnel provided as part of Shearson Lehman's 60% share of the commissions generated. 37. At the time that Mid Atlantic and Shearson Lehman took over management of the township police and service employees pension funds said funds were valued at $1,377,246 and $251,053 respectively. a. Other funds were unavailable because they were invested in various annuities, insurance policies and certificates of deposit that were not yet mature. 38. Commission statements of Shearson Lehman Brothers reflect Dana Craig was the only Shearson Lehman Representative to receive commission' payments from the South Fayette Township Pension Funds accounts. a . Date Paid 7/17/92 7/24/92 8/14/92 10/30/92 12/18/92 11/20/92 1/15/93 1/22/93 1/22/93 2/12/93 39. Commissions paid on individual accounts include: Amount Net Account # Paid Commission 7360125012090 7365871818090 7365871917090 7365871818090 7360077510090 7365871917090 7360208115090 7365871818090 7360125012090 7365871917090 $1,182.32 715.21 206.93 720.68 337.53 323.51 1,468.08 755.62 983.24 376.13 $ 368.41 278.93 86.91 288.27 135.01 135.87 1,148.37 241.80 258.00 150.45 Reason Inception fee MGT Fee TRAK Inception fee 4th QT fee Inception fee Fee Inception fee MGT fee MGT fee QT fee Shearson Lehman received commissions totalling $7,069.25, from the Township Pension Plans. a. Dana Craig received net commissions totalling $3,092.02. 40. Rank did not receive any commission payments from the South Fayette Township Pension Funds managed by Shearson Lehman. a. He did not receive a finders fee for bringing Mid Atlantic and Shearson Lehman together. b. Rank's performance at Shearson Lehman is not evaluated based upon business he brings in for the company Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 12 III. DISCUSSION: as follows: Township, Alan Rank, that term is defined such, his conduct is and the restrictions As a Commissioner for South Fayette hereinafter Rank, is a public official as under Act 9 of 1989. 65 P.S. 5402. As subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law therein are applicable to him. Initially, it is noted that Section 9 of Act 9 of 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. Since the occurrences in this case transpired after effective date of Act 9 (June 26, 1989), we must apply provisions of Act 9 to determine whether the Ethics Act 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. The term "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 9 of 1989 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 his 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 June 26, the the was Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 13 65 P.S. §402. employee, a member or his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. In addition, Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 specifically provides in part that no public official /employee or spouse or child or business with which he or the spouse or child is associated may enter into a contract with his governmental body valued at five hundred dollars or more or any subcontract valued at five hundred dollars or more with any person who has been awarded a contract with the governmental body with which the public official /employee is associated unless the contract is awarded through an open and public process including prior public notice and subsequent public disclosure. The is before us is whether Rank as a South Fayette Township Commissioner violated either Section 3(a) or 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding the allegation that he used the authority of office to recommend the appointment of a financial consultant for the Township Police and Employee Pension Funds after which the financial consultant subcontracted with a company wherein Rank served as Vice President. Factually, Rank has served as a Commissioner since January 1986 and as Finance Committee Chairman during 1990 -1991. Part of the functions of the Finance Chairman is to oversee all financial aspects of the Township's operation including the pension funds. In a private capacity Rank was employed as a financial consultant by Shearson Lehman Brothers and then by Smith Barney Shearson, Inc. after a merger occurred. Although the Township maintained pension plans for the police and non - uniform employees since 1970, changes in the investment environment and reductions in state contributions reduced the amount of returns on the pension fund investments. In November 1990, Rank began to research alternative businesses and investments for the pensions. There was an informal discussion between the Commission Chairman and Rank that he should review the pension fund investments. The Commissioners considered Rank to be most qualified to conduct the review because he was employed in that particular field. At a November 10, 1990 Board meeting, Rank reported that he started looking into pension plan alternatives. On May 3, 1990, the Township received a proposal from its actuarial firm, Mockenhaupt, Mockenhaupt, Cowder and Parks (MMC &P) to update the pension plans. The Township minutes of March 11, 1991 reflect that the proposals of MMC &P were accepted with Rank voting with the majority which culminated in action on October 14, 1991 to adopt Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 14 two resolutions as moved by Rank. The revised police pension plan was adopted contingent upon the finalization of certain items with the Police Department; the service employees pension plan was adopted contingent upon the review and approval of Rank and the Solicitor. None of the Commissioners . except Rank were involved in the process of making inquiries or contacting companies as to pension services and fees. Although Rank solicited bids from Commonwealth Security and Mid Atlanl tc Capital to act as plan administrator, Commonwealth Security did not submit a proposal because it did not perform pension plan administration services. Mid Atlantic Capital did quote Rank a price after Rank contacted James Kintley and James Berquist of Mid Atlantic. Berquist is the Senior Vice President in charge of perspective clients and is also an acquaintance of Rank. Solicitation of Mid Atlantic was limited to providing pension plan consulting services even though that company has the ability to provide other investment services. The Mid Atlantic proposal was the only one brought before the _Commissioners by Rank for consideration. The Commissioners voted to hire Mid Atlantic based upon Rank's recommendation. Berquist of Mid Atlantic was aware that Shearson Lehman offered managed money services. -The Mid Atlantic Group is not, however, affiliated with Shearson Lehman which is a distinct business entity. Rank advised James Kintley of Mid Atlantic that if Shearson Lehman were selected, he should use Dana Craig as the account representative. Thereafter, Kintley of Mid Atlantic interviewed Dana Craig for the position of account manager with no other people being interviewed. Mid Atlantic hired Shearson Lehman to serve as the accounts money manager and custodian of the funds with Dana Craig hired as account representative. The Township Board took no official action regarding the hiring of Shearson Lehman and the Township Commissioners, other than Rank, did not know of Shearson Lehman's involvement. Mid Atlantic was responsible for selecting the investment brokers who would make the recommendations for the stock and bond purchases. Shearson Lehman did the actual purchasing of the stock and bonds and retained custody of the accounts' assets. For such services, Shearson Lehman, as manager of the accounts, received commissions based on a percentage of the accounts' assets. For every dollar of a fee or commission generated, Shearson Lehman would receive 60% for agency operating expenses and clerical personnel and the agent would receive 40% as .. generated commission. Both Rank and Dana Craig worked on the '60-40% commission basis. Although Dana Craig did receive net. commissions of over $3,000.00 from the Township pension plans, Rank did not receive any commissions nor finder fees. The performance of Rank at Shearson Lehman was not evaluated based upon any business he Rank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 15 obtained for the company. Lastly, Rank did list that he was a Vice President on his Financial Interests Statements which he filed with the Township. In applying the provisions of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 to the above facts, we find no violation of that aspect of the allegation based upon an insufficiency of evidence. It is clear that Rank as a public official did use the authority of office by making the selection and recommendation to the Township regarding the police and employe pension plans. It is also true that a private pecuniary benefit resulted in that various fees or commissions were generated regarding the pension plans. However, what we find to be lacking in the evidence of record is the requisite element that the private pecuniary benefit inured to either Rank individually or to a business with which he is associated. It is clear from his official action that MMC &P as well as Mid Atlantic received private pecuniary benefits. However, the is insufficient to establish that Rank was associated with either of those businesses. The term "business with which he is associated" is defined under the Ethics Law as follows: Section 2. Definitions "Business with which he is associated." Any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee or has a financial interest. 65 P.S. Turning to the matter of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989, since Mid Atlantic did utilize Shearson Lehman, a business with which Rank was associated as an investment broker, we must conclude that such an agreement between Mid Atlantic and Shearson Lehman constituted a contract. The subcontract as to Shearson Lehman in this case did derive from the general contract between the Township and Mid Atlantic. Therefore we find a technical violation of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 in that the contract was valued at $500.00 or more and was not made through an open process as required by the Ethics Law. Our decision above is in accord with Katz, Order 885, wherein we determined that a township commissioner violated Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding the award of a contract to a firm which awarded a subcontract to a business with which a member of the township_commissioner's immediate family was associated where the subcontract was in excess of $500.00 and was not awarded through an open and public process. Given the totality of the facts and circumstances of this Bank, 92- 068 -C2 Page 16 case, we will take no further action. However, since Rank continues to serve as a Commissioner, we must remind him to adhere to the letter and spirit of the Ethics Law and caution him regarding the disclosure requirements of Section 3(j) of the Ethics Law concerning any conflicts. In addition, as per the requirements of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989, Rank is prohibited from having any supervisory or overall responsibility for the implementation or administration of the contract. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW - 1. Alan Rank, as a Commissioner in South Fayette Township, Allegheny County, is a public official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989. 2. Rank did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding the use of authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for a financial consultant based upon an insufficiency of evidence. 3. A technical violation of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred by Rank as to an award of a contract between the Township and a financial consultant which awarded a subcontract to a business with which Rank was associated in that the contracting was in excess of $500.00 and was not awarded through an open and public process. In Re: Alan Rank File Docket: 92- 068 -C2 . Date Decided: December 7, 1993 . Date Mailed: December 10, 1993 ORDER NO. 909 1. Alan Rank, as a Commissioner in South Fayette Township, Allegheny County, did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding the use of authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for a financial consultant based upon an insufficie..cy of evidence. 2. A technical violation of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred by Rank as to an award of a contract between the Township and a financial consultant which awarded a subcontract to a business with which Rank was associated in that the contracting was in excess of $500.00 and was not awarded through an open and public process. 3. Based upon the totality of the facts and circumstances, no further action will be taken in this case. BY THE COMMISSION, JAMES M. HOWLEY, Commissioner Dennis C. Harrington dissents from the finding of a technical violation of Section 3(f) of Act 9 of 1989.