Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout919 TheeIn Re: Nicholas Thee STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 : File Docket: 93- 036 -C2 : Date Decided: 02/17/94 Date Mailed: 02/24/94 Before: James M. Howley, 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 seg. 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 521.29(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). Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That, Nicholas Thee, Tax Collector for Lansdale Borough, Montgomery County, violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 9 of 1989) when he charged a tax certification fee without ordinance approving the collection of said fees. Section 3. Restricted Activities (a) No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 P.S. S403(a). II. FINDINGS: 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 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. 5402. 1. Nicholas Thee has served as the Borough of Lansdale Tax Collector from January of 1986 to the present. 2. Thee served on the Lansdale Borough Council from 1966 to 1974 and held the position of Constable from 1975 to 1985. 3. Thee's duties as Tax Collector include collecting taxes for the Borough, the County, and the School District. 4. Thee's compensation as tax collector for collection of the Borough's taxes is fixed by Borough Council. Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 3 a. The school district pays Thee a fee for each tax bill he collects. (1) There is a cap on the total amount Thee may be compensated by the sohool district. b. The county pays Thee a flat rate for the collection of county taxes. 5. Thee provides residents of the Borough with information about taxes on their properties at no charge. 6. Various businesses, including abstract companies, realtors, banks and attorneys, request a certified document stating the taxes have been paid on a certain property. 7. Tax certifications are generally requested in order to prove that all taxes due on real property have been paid. a. An official tax certification can only be obtained from the authority or the tax collector. 8. Thee is not required by law to provide the information. 9. Thee has provided tax certifications to the companies since taking office for a fee of $15.00 per certification. a. The practice of the tax collector receiving a Fifteen ($15.00) Dollar per certification fee has existed in the Borough of Lansdale for at ,least twenty (20) years prior to January of 1986. 10. The two previous Borough tax collectors also provided tax certifications for a fee. a. The fee collected by the two previous tax collectors was the same as that collected by Thee. 11. Thee estimates the cost of researching the information, preparing the document, stationery, and stamps at $7.50 to $9.00 per certification. 12. Thee himself does most of the work to process the certification. 13. Thee's daughter assists him on occasion, but is not paid a salary. 14. Thee keeps the money, in excess of his expenses, as compensation for his work. Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 4 15. Prior to March of 1993, Lansdale Borough Council had not passed an ordinance establishing a tax certification fee. 16. On April 4, 1993, Lansdale Borough Council, passed Borough Ordinance #1497 authorizing the Tax Collector to charge a fee of $15.00, for preparing and providing a real estate tax certification, which would be retained by the Tax Collector for providing such services. 17. Thee obtains "the information provided on the tax certification documents from the official records in his possession as Tax Collector. 18. Thee provided the information on a form which contained the letterhead "Tax Certification, Borough of Lansdale" and contained the signature of "Nicholas Thee, Tax Collector ". 19. Documents of the office of tax collector for Lansdale Borough indicate the fees collected by Thee for the issuance of the following tax certification from 1988: Date Name Stamped Paid Amount 02/03/88 Fidelity Abstract Yes $ 15.00 03/09/88 D. Novatnak No $ 15.00 04/07/88 Fox and Lazzo No $ 15.00 04/20/88 Ticor Title Ins No $ 15.00 05/11/88 Security Abstract No $ 15.00 05/27/88 Security Abstract No $ 15.00 07/06/88 Security Abstract No $ 15.00 10/04/88 Stevens - Korkus Realtors No $ 15.00 10/17/88 North Penn Abstract No $ 15.00 10/21/88 R. Moyer & E. Blythe No $ 15.00 11/14/88 John L. Hendricks Auction No $ 15.00 12/19/88 North Penn Abstract No $ 15.00 12/29/88 Re /Max Central Inc. Yes $ 15.00 12/30/88 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/04/89 Drake, Hileman & Davis Yes $ 15.00 01/09/89 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/10/89 Dischell, Bartle, Yanoff Yes $ 15.00 01/16/89 Industrial Valley Title Yes $ 15.00 02/15/89 Frank Bartle No $ 15.00 02/15/89 Evans Abstract No $ 15.00 06/09/89 Miller, Shore & Guerra No $ 15.00 06/16/89 Frankford Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/08/89 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/21/89 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/05/89 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/23/89 Century 21 Messa Yes $ 15.00 08/23/89 North Penn Abstract No $ 15.00 09/07/89 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 09/15/89 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 5 09/15/89 09/18/89 09/18/89 09/19/89 09/19/89 09/19/89 09/20/89 09/20/89 09/25/89 10/04/89 10/05/89 10/09/89 10/09/89 .10/09/89 10/16/89 10/16/89 10/16/89 10/16/89 10/16/89 10/23/89 10/31/89 11/02/89 ii/08/89 11/08/89 11/09/89 11/09/89 11/09/89 11/09/89 11/09/89 11/09/89 11/13/89 11/16/89 11/16/89 11/17/89 11/17/89 11/20/89 11/20/89 11/20/89 11/28/89 12/01/89 12/04/89 12/04/89 12/07/89 12/07/89 12/13/89 12/13/89 12/13/89 12/13/89 12/15/89 12/19/89 06/15/90 Evans Abstract RE /MAX Central North Penn Abstract Blank Cassels ERA Schoelkope & Mullaney Grosse & Quade North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Surburban Home Ken Kratz Realtors North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Ken Kratz Realtors Southeastern- Abstract Century 21 Grosse & Quade Ken Kratz Realtors North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Security Abstract Superior Abstract Holland Abstract Grim, Riehn, Thatcher & Wolf Souder, Rosenberger, Lapp Dischell, Bartle, Yanoff T.A. Title Security Abstract North Penn Abstract Ken Kratz Realtors Security Abstract Tohickon Abstract Fidelity Abstract Evans Abstract North Penn Abstract Evans Abstract North Penn Abstract Cassel's ERA_ Realty Corp. Nancy DelVecchio Collins & Slotter Realty North Penn Abstract Security Abstract North Penn. Abstract North Penn Abstract Evans Abstract Doylestown Abstract Century 21 Messa Evans Abstract North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Evans Abstract No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.80 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.Q9 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 6 06/15/90 Ken Kratz Yes $ 15.00 06/21/90 Tohickon Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/22/90 Ken Kratz Yes $ 15.00 06/22/90 Ken Kratz Yes $ 15.00 06/25/90 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/25/90 Evans Abstract No $ 15.00 06/25/90 Wm. Emmerick In. Yes $ 15.00 06/25/90 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/02/90 Century 21 Messa Yes $ 15.00 07/02/90 Century 21 Messa Yes $ 15.00 07/02/90 Daily's Associates LTD Yes $ 15.00 07/02/90 ReMax Yes $ 15.00 07/05/90 TA Title Yes $ 15.00 07/05/90 Ken Kratz No $ 15.00 07/06/90 Ken Kratz Yes $ 15.00 07/06/90 Metes & Bounds Inc. Yes $ 15.00 07/09/90 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/13/90 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/13/90 Cross County Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/13/90 Neshaminy Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/13/90 The Prudential Yes $ 15.00 07/16/90 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/18/90 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/19/90 ReMax Action Realty ' Yes $ 15.00 07/19/90 Sanford Alderfer Yes $ 15.00 07/20/90 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 12/27/90 Fidelity Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/04/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/10/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01117/91 Broker's Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/17/91 Security Abstract Yes $. 15.00 01/28/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/28/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/31/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 02/08/91 Quaker Abstract Yes $ 15.00 02/11/91 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 02/23/91 TA Title Yes $ 15.00 03/15/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 03/18/91 Pearistine Salkin Assoc. Yes $ 15.00 03/21/91 Daily's Assoc. Yes $ 15.00 03/28/91 The Prudential Yes $ 15.00 03/28/91 Industrial Valley Title Yes $ 15.00 03/28/91 Grim, Biehn, Thatcher & Help Yes $ 15.00 03/28/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/05/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/05/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/16/91 Broker's Abstract No $ 15.00 04/18/91 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/18/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/19/91 Dally's Assoc. No $ 15.00 05/02/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 7 05/02/91 North Penn Abstract Yee $ 15.00 05/02/91 Frank Bartle Yes $ 15.00 05/02/91 Frank Bartle Yes $ 15.00 05/03/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 05/13/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 05/14/91 Frank Bartle Yes $ 15.00 05/16/91 Cassel's ERA Yes $ 15.00 05/20/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/04/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/07/91 North Penn Abstract No $ 15.00 06/07/91 Century 21 Grosse.& Quade Yes $ 15.00 06/10/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/11/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 06/17/91? Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 .07/01/91- Assurance Abstract Yes 15.00 07/09/91 Paona Realty No $ 15.00 07/18/91 Re /Max Heritage Realty Yes $ 15.00 07/18/91 North Penn Abstract 'Yes $ 15.00 07/18/91 Re /Max Heritage Realty Yes $ 15.00 07/22/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/24/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 07/26/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/01/91 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/02/91: Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/02/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/06/91 Paone Realty No $ 15.00 08/06/91 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/09/91 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/15/91 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 08/26/917 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 09/06/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 09/06/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 09/06/91 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/05/92 Cardinal Abstract Yes $ 15.00 03/13/92 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 04/09/92 Ken Kratz Realtors Yes $ 15.00 01/05/93 Guaranteed Abstract No $ 15.00 01/06/93 West Ridge Abstract No $ 15.00 01/08/93 North Penn Abstract . Yes $ 15.00 01/08/93 Dager & Dager Realtors Yes $ 15.00 01/08/93 Fidelity Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/08/93 Security Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/12/93 Re /Max Heritage Realty Yes $ 15.00 01/12/93 Evans Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/12/93 Coldwell Banker Yes $ 15.00 01/15/93 Reeves C. Miller Yes $ 15.00 01/15/93 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/15/93 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/21/93 Grosse & Quade Yes $ 15.00 01/21/93 North Penn Abstract Yes $ 15.00 01/21/93 Pat Hoban Yes $ 15.00 Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 8 01/21/93 01/25/93 01/25/93 01/28/93 01/28/93 01/28/93 01/28/93 01/28/93 01/29/93 02/01/93 02/04/93 02/04/93 02/04/93 02/04/93 02/08/93 02/08/93 02/09/93 02/09/93 02/11/93 02/11/93 02/11/93 02/16193 02/16%•93 02/18/93 02/18/93 02/18/93 02/18/93 02/18/93 02/23/93 03/01/93 03/01/93 03/01/93 03/02/93 03/04/93 03/04/93 03/05/93 03/07/93 03/11/93 03/16/93 1988 3 1-1' 1989 51 14 1990 26 2 1991 52 5 1992 3 1993 48 6 West Ridge Abstract North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Dallys Associates Century 21 Messa Real Estate Service Group North Penn Abstract Century 21 Messa TA Title North Penn Abstract Evans Abstract . North Penn Abstract Mullaney Law Offices North'Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Grosse & Quade Century 21 Tri- County Abstract Carl Keyser Pro - Search Inc. Grosse & Quade Americor Abstract Security Search & Abstract Security Search & Abstract Laurel Abstract Titan Abstract Brode & Brocks Hambukg Rubin,Mullin & Maxwel North Penn Abstract North Penn Abstract Neshaminy Abstract Metropolitan Abstract Dallys Associates Cardinal Abstract Neshaminy Abstract Quaker Abstract Signature Agency Neshaminy Abstract Savings Abstract Evans Abstract 20. The total profits for issuance of tax cert records indicated that said fee was paid Year Pd /Not Pd /Total Billed Received 14 $ 210.00 $ 45.00 $ 126.00 65 $ 975.00 $ 765.00 $ 585.00 27 $ 420.00 $ 390.00 $ 252.00 57 $ 855.00 $ 780.00 $ 513.00 3 $ . 45.00 $ 45.00 •$ • 27.00 54 $ 810.00 $ 720.00 $ 486.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $- 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes - $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 Yes $ 15.00 No $ 15.00 ifications where the were as follows: Processing Net Profit* $(81.00) $180.00 $138.00 $257.00 '$ 18.00 $234.00 Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 9 Totals 183 38 221 $3315.00 $2745.00 $1989.00 $756.00 * Profit was based on a $6.0 net profit per certification and $9.00 figure to process said certifications. 21. The foregoing calculations are based upon the records of the office of the tax collector. a. The net profit takes into account the $9.00 processing costs where no fee was paid. 22. Records on file at Security ,Abstract, Worcester Trade Center, 1741 Valley Forge Road, Worcester, PA - 19490, indicate the following payments were made to Lansdale Borough Tax Collector Nicholas Thee: Date Address of Property Check # Check Date Mart 366 Mount Vernon Street 58586 05/31/88 $ 15.00 832 W. Fourth Street 58762 06/15/88 $ 15.00 05/11/88 05/27/88 23. Records on file at Evans Abstract, 608 W. Main Street, Lansdale, PA 19446, indicate the following payments were made to Lansdale Borough Tax Collector Nicholas Thee: Date 02/15/89 11/17/89 12/13/89 06/25/90 03/16/93 Date a. These items were not stamped as paid in the records of the tax collector. a . Address of Property 16 W. Third Street 631 Salem Drive 499 Wade Street 162 E. Main Street 635 Franklin Street 10/17/88 731 W. Third Street 12/19/88 949 Wedgewood Street 08/23/89 West Eight Street Check # Check Date 27036 42302 .43624 53691 06823 02/28/89 12/01/89 12/29/89 07/05/90 04/21/93 Mart $ 15.00 $ 15.03 $ 15.03 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 These items were - stamped as paid in the records of the tax collector. 24. Records on file at Worth Penn Abstract, 35 Green Street, Lansdale, PA 19446, indicate the following payments were made to Lansdale Borough Tax Collector Nicholas Thee: Address of Property Check # Check Date Imre 34480 12/28/88 $ 15.00 35405 12/30/88 $ 15.00 43410 08/31/89 $ 15.E Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 10 12/07/89 12/15/89 12/19/89 06/07/91 640 Jackson Street 48299 12/15/89 324 W. Fifth Street 47588 12/27/89 327 Mount Vernon Street 48280 12/19/89 526 E. Hancock Street 61520 06/12/91 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 $ 15.00 a. These items were stamped as paid in the records of the tax collector. 25. None of the payments noted in Findings 23 -25 above were recorded in the records of the tax collector. 26. The total profits realized by Thee for the issuance of the certification as evidence by the records of the tax collector and abstract companies were as follows: Year Pd /Not Pd /Total Billed Received Processing Net Profit* 1988 7 7 14 $ 210.00 $ 105.00 $ 126.00 $( 1989 58 7 65 $ 975.00 $ 870.00 $ 585.00 $285.00 1990 27 1 28 $ 420.00 $ 405.00 $ 252.00 $152.00 1991 53 4 57 $ 855.00 $ 795.00 $ 513.00 $282.00 1992 3 3 $ 45.00 $ 45.00 $ 27.00 $ 18.00 1993 49 5 54 $ 810.00 $ 735.00 $ 486.00 $249.00 Totals 197 24 221 $3315.00 $2745.00 $1989.00 $966.00 * Profits were based upon the $6.00 figure. 27. Nicholas Thee did not file State EthicS Commission Statements of Financial Interests for the years 1989, 1990, and 1991. a. Thee did not realize that financial interest statements needed to be filed for the years 1989, 1990, and 1991. 28. Nicholas Thee did not intend to accept any compensation to which he -was not entitled. a. Thee. was following the practice of past Tax Collectors. 29. Thee did not intend to violate the State Ethics Law. III. DISCUSSION: As a Tax Collector for Lansdale Borough, Nicholas Thee, hereinafter Thee, is a public official as that term is defined under Act 9 of 1989. 65 P.S. S402. As such, his conduct is subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law and the restrictions therein are applicable to him. Initially, it is noted that Section 9 of Act 9 of June 26, 1989 provides, in part, as follows: Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 11 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 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. We must decide whether Thee violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 as to the allegation that he charged tax certification fees without ordinance approving such collection. Thee served as the Lansdale Borough Tax Collector from January 1986 to the present with duties consisting of tax collection for the borough, county and school district. As to the three taxing bodies, the borough council fixed Thee's compensation as a tax collector for the borough, the school district paid Thee a fee for each tax bill collected with a cap on the total amount of compensation and the county paid Thee a flat fee for the collection of county taxes. Although Thee does provide residents of the borough with information about taxes on their properties without charge, there is a tax certification fee for businesses, abstract companies, realtors, banks and attorneys who request a certified document stating that taxes have been paid as to a certain property. The tax certification may only be obtained from the tax collector who is not required by law to provide such information. Thee has provided the tax certifications during his term of Tax Collector at a charge of $15.00 per certification which is a continuation of the practice of tax certification fees charged by the previous two tax collectors. Although the gross amount received per tax certification by Thee amounts to $15.00, the cost of researching the information and preparing the document with stationery and stamps amounts to approximately $7.50 to $9.00 per certification. Thee himself does most of the work to process the certifications and keeps the net Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 12 profit as compensation for his work. There was no borough ordinance in place establishing a tax certification fee until April 4, 1993 when the Lansdale Borough Council passed Ordinance #1497 which authorized the Tax Collector to charge a fee of $15.00 for such services. A review of the records of Thee as well as certain abstract companies reflect that the total amount of net profit received by Thee for tax certifications for the years 1988 through 1993 amounted to $966.00. Fact Finding 26. Lastly, Thee- did not file Financial Interest Statements (FIS's) for the calendar years 1989 through 1991. In applying the provisions of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 to the above facts, we must "determine whether there was use of office on the part of Thee to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself as to the fees he collected for tax certifications. It is clear that there was a use of authority of office on the part of Thee in that he, by virtue of his position of elected Tax Collector, was able to exact these fees for tax certifications. Juliante, Order 809. The tax certification fees went to Thee himself and hence the fees were a pecuniary benefit. However, the question before us is whether the pecuniary benefit received by Thee was private. In order to make that determination, we must review both statutory and decisional law on this issue. The Local Tax Collection Law of 1945, P.L. 1050, Section 35, as amended, 72 P.S. 5511.35: "The tax collector in boroughs and townships of the second class shall receive, as compensation for the collection of county, institution district, borough and township taxes, salary, wages or a commission on all such taxes to be fixed by the respective taxing authorities levying such taxes, not exceeding five per centum of the amount collected. In the case of school district taxes, the commission or compensation of the tax collector shall be determined by the board of school directors, and the total cost of such collection shall be reported, annually to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and shall be published in his report. For the collection of county, institution district, school district, borough and township taxes, the tax collector shall be allowed by the respective taxing authorities, actual and needful expenditures for printing, postage, books, blanks and forms." The above provision of law does allow compensation to a tax Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 13 collector consisting of a percentage commission collected plus certain allowed expenditures. Nowhere does the law allow for charging for tax certifications. Unless tax certification fees are provided for by law, a tax collector may not receive such a fihancial gain. The concept that a tax collector may only receive compensation which is legislatively provided is well rooted in decisional law. See.Rachael v. Forest Hills School District, 94 Pa. Commw. Ct. 130, 503 A.2d 472 1986: "...the right of a tax collector to receive the compensation annexed to his office is legislative, not contractual. Tarner v. Chambersburg Borough School District, 338 Pa. 417, 12 A.2d 106 (1940) . 4 Further, this Court has stated, in dealing with a state statute, that when a provision can be interpreted to benefit either a private party or the Commonwealth, it must be presumed that the legislature intended to favor the public interest." Id. at 476. A tax collector may not charge any fee unless it is specifically provided for by law. In Brown v. LeSuer 149 Pa. Super. 192, 27 A.2d (1942), the mortgage holder of certain realty sought to pay the liens, including a 5% penalty, to prevent foreclosure. When the tax collector refused to accept the payment unless an additional 5% fee was paid to her as her commission, such payment was made under protest followed by a civil action to recover the 5% fee. The trial court found in favor of the mortgagee and the tax collector appealed. The Superior Court affirmed, holding that the tax collector had no authority to charge such a fee due to the lack of statutory authority: "It is well settled that one who demands payment of a tax must show statutory authority for the imposition and collection of the tax: Central Penna Lumber Co.'s APR-, 232 Pa. 191, 193, 81 A,204; Schmuck v. Hartman, 222 Pa. 191, 195, 70 A. 1091; and the principle applies equally well to one who seeks to collect a fee, commission or charge from the taxpayer for his services in effecting the collection` of a tax lawfully imposed. Unless statutory authority for the collection of such fee, commission or charge from the taxpayer is shown 'he cannot be required to pay it: Com. v. Scott, 88 Pa. Superior Ct. 68, 71, reversed on another point in 287 Pa. 302, 135 A.225. A practice, even though long established, of collecting such unauthorized fee, commission or charge will not make it legal: Lawrence County v. Horner, 281 Pa. 336, 342, 126 A.783." Id. at 195, 196. Thee, Nicholas, 93- 036 -C2 Page 14 Therefore based upon the above it is clear that the pecuniary benefit received by Thee was private and hence violative of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989. We note that our decision in this case follows our prior precedent in.Al.len, Order 612 -R, wherein we determined that a tax collector violated Section 3(a) of Act 170 of 1978 when he received tax certifications which were not authorized in law so as to be a financial gain other than compensation provided for by law. Given the facts that Thee followed the prior practice of the previous two tax collectors and did not intend to violate the Ethics Law, we therefore find, giving due consideration to all facts and circumstances of this case, a technical violation by Thee in charging for tax certifications. Section 7 (13 )_of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. 407 (13) empowers this Commission to impose restitution upon a public official /employee who has obtained a financial gain in violation of the Ethics Law. Thee is directed within thirty (30) days of the date of issuance of this order to make payment through this Commission to Lansdale Borough in the amount of $966.00. We also direct Thee within thirty (30) days of the date of issuance of this Order to file FIS's for the 1989 through 1991 years. Failure by Thee to either make repayment of the $966.00 to Lansdale Borough or to file the FIS's as noted above will result in a directive of this Commission to institute an order enforcement action in Commonwealth court. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Nicholas Thee as the Lansdale Borough Tax Collector is a public official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989. 2. A technical violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred when Thee used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself consisting of tax certification fees which were not authorized in law. 3. The private pecuniary benefit received by Thee amounted to $966.00. In Re: Nicholas Thee File Docket: 93- 036 -C2 Date Decided: 02/17/94 Date Mailed: 02/24/94 ORDER NO. 919, 1. A technical violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred when Nicholas Thee as the Lansdale Borough Tax Collector used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit of $966.00 for himself consisting of tax certification fees which were not authorized in law. 2. Thee is directed within thirty (30) days of the date of issuance of this order to make restitution in the amount of $966.00 through this Commission to Lansdale Borough. 3. Thee is directed within thirty (30) days of issuance of this order to file Financial Interest Statements for the years 1989 through 1991. 4. Failure to comply with the provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 above will result in a directive of this Commission to institute an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, ' JAMES M. HOWLE , IR