Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1022 GreenIn Re: James Green STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 File Docket: 94- 066 -C2 Date Decided: 8/27/96 Date Mailed: 9/13/96 Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair Austin M. Lee, Vice Chair Roy W. Wilt Allan M. Kluger Rev. Joseph G. Quinn Boyd E. Wolff This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission. Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. §401 at seq., by the above - named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was filed and a hearing was held. The record is complete. This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission will be made available as a public document thirty days after the mailing date noted above. However, reconsideration may be requested. Any reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within thirty days of the mailing date 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). A request for reconsideration will not affect the finality of this adjudication but will defer its public release pending action on the request by the Commission. The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. §408(h). Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Law 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). Confidentiality does not preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That James Green, a public official in his capacity as a Supervisor for Logan Township, Blair County, violated Section 3(a) of the State Ethics Act (Act 9 of 1989) when he used the authority of his office for a private pecuniary benefit by submitting and /or approving reimbursement for and subsequently receiving expenses for a companion accompanying him to State Conventions. I1. FINDINGS: A. Pleadings 1. On January 3, 1995, a letter was forwarded to James Green, by the Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission informing him that a complaint against him was received by the Investigative Division and that a full investigation was being commenced. a. Said letter was forwarded by certified mail, No. P 016 239 160. 2. The Investigative Complaint was mailed to the Respondent on December 22, 1995. 3. James Green served as a Supervisor for Logan Township, Blair County, from 1988 through 1993. a. James Green also served as township roadmaster for the years 1988 through 1993. 4. The Logan Township Supervisors are compensated for attendance at meetings. a. In 1990, the supervisors were paid $50.00 per meeting not to exceed 50 meetings per year. b. In 1991, Township Ordinance 1 -07 -91 was established which authorized each member of the Board of Supervisors of Logan Township to be compensated $2,600.00 per year to be paid on a monthly basis. 5. The Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors (PSATS) sponsors an annual convention in Hershey, Pennsylvania. 6. As a Logan Township Supervisor, James Green attended the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisor Conventions. a. James Green attended the PSATS Conventions from 1990 through 1993. b. Green attended the 1991 and 1992 conventions with his wife, who at the time was his girlfriend. 7. The 1991 PSATS Convention was held in Hershey, Pennsylvania, from April 7, 1991, to April 10, 1991. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 3 a. Logan Township prepaid expenses on behalf of James Green which included conference registration, guest registration and room deposit as follows: Registration: $70.00 Guest Registration: $35.00 Room Deposit: $90.00 b. Payment was made by Logan Township Check No. 9653 on January 2, 1991. 8. James Green submitted the following expenses for his attendance at the 1991 Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisor Convention. Departure: 04/07/91 Return: 04/10/91 Hotel Expenses: $ 44.06 Meals and Tips: Lucy's Cafe: $141.13 *Attended by other township officials Blank Receipt: $ 39.93 Kreider Dairy Farms: $ 10.81 Hershey Lodge: $ 8.50 Total: $ 200.37 Travel: 354 miles @ .275 /mile $ 97.35 TOTAL EXPENSES $341.78 a. [Some] meal expenses submitted by Green included meal expenses incurred by his wife. 9. The 1992 PSATS Convention was held in Hershey Pennsylvania from April 5, 1992, through April 8, 1992. a. Logan Township prepaid expenses for Green as follows: Registration: $ 70.00 Guest Registration: $ 35.00 Room Deposit: $ 90.00 $195.00 b. Payment was made by Logan Township Check No. 11270 on January 2, 1992. 10. Delegate /Guest Convention Registration form submitted on behalf of James Green identified his guest as Jean Patterson. a. Jean Patterson is now the wife of James Green. 11. James Green submitted for reimbursement the following expenses for attendance at the 1992 PSATS Convention: Departure: 04/05/92 Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 4 Return: 04/08/92 Hotel Expenses: Travel: 330 miles @ .285 /mile Meals and Tips: Hotel Hershey: New York Steak & Seafood: TOTAL EXPENSES $125.13 $ 94.05 $ 23.14 $163.36 $405.92 a. The meal at New York Steak & Seafood included other township officials and spouses. 12. Minutes of the Logan Township Supervisor Meetings confirm that Green approved the payment of bills which included his convention expenses. Meeting Check Check Date Number Amount 04/18/91 10132 $341.78 3 -0 06/04/92 11994 $405.92 3 -0 Action by Green & Vote 13. Logan Township paid expenses on behalf of James Green's guest. 14. It has been a routine practice in Logan Township for elected and public officials to have spouses and /or companions accompany them as guests to PSATS conventions. a. Prior members of the board of supervisors, the former township manager and the solicitor have had spouses accompany them to conventions. b. The township has paid the costs associated with the guest's attendance at conventions. c. The former township manager advised the supervisors that it was legal to have the township pay for spouses' attendance. 15. The Respondent makes the following legal arguments: a. The Second Class Township Code authorizes reimbursement for a guest at PSATS conventions. b. 53 P.S. 65612 provides for payment of actual expenses that the Board agrees to pay and the Board unanimously approved the expenses. c. The audits of Logan Township by a CPA contain no findings as to PSATS convention expenses. d. Finding violations for such expenses by the State Ethics Commission is a usurpation of the authority granted by the General Assembly to Supervisors' Boards. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 5 e. There was no use of authority of office by Respondent in obtaining such reimbursements. f. Others in Logan Township received reimbursement in 1988 based upon a room with double occupancy at the PSATS convention. The former Township Manager advised Respondent that it was legal to have the Township pay for a guest at the PSATS convention. h. The policy and practice for expense reimbursement was set before Respondent became a supervisor so that there was no use of authority of office. g. The Logan Township policy of authorizing reimbursement occurred prior to Act 9 of 1989 so that there can be no violation of Act 9. j• There was no ascertainment of meals eaten by other than Respondent which would be de minimis in any event. k. There has been selective prosecution and disparate treatment. I. There has been prosecutorial vindictiveness: (1) Selective prosecution (2) Taking or destroying records /property of Logan Township (3) Bias /prejudice to Respondent (4) Violation of due process rights. B. Testimony 16. Bonnie Lewis is the Assistant Secretary- Treasurer of Logan Township. a. Lewis is the Assistant Custodian of the Township records. b. Certified copies of the Minutes from January, 1990 to June, 1995 were provided to the Investigative Division. c. Lewis supplied copies of documents relating to the PSATS conventions to the Investigative Division which are labeled Exhibits 6 -9. (1) For the relevant time period, the Township paid the guest registrations of persons who accompanied the Supervisors to the annual PSATS conventions. d. When an Investigative Division Investigator was photocopying Township documents in July, 1995, an original was discovered in a pile of photocopies. (1) This occurred while a large amount of paper was moving around. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 6 (2) When Lewis made note of the original to the Investigator, it was immediately given back to her. e. The "recap sheet" which Lewis used to list the photocopied documents was missing. (1) The Investigative Division Investigator had a copy which he sent to Lewis by FAX. f. The Investigative Division Investigator sent by FAX the FIS of Barton, the original of which was missing in the Township files. g. Lewis began keeping the records of Township meetings in July, 1992. h. The compensation for Supervisors was set at $2,600.00 per year by Ordinance 1 -7 -91. (1) In certain years, Supervisors received $2,400.00 per year but were entitled to $2,600.00. 17. Michelle Hollis is the Office Manager at the Hotel Hershey. a. Any particular charge that is signed for by a hotel guest is billed to the room account. b. As to meal bills, the number of guests served and meals served are reflected. (1) The bill does not reflect which people were with the guest. (2) The bill does not indicate who ate which meal. c. If guests had separate bills, it would be reflected to their room account. 18. Robert Caruso is the Deputy Executive Director and Director of Investigations. a. Caruso supervises the investigative staff. b. There is a process as to the receipt of sworn complaints and the initiation of investigations. c. A sworn complaint, if opened after review, will receive a docket number that triggers the time requirements. (1) There is 60 days to complete a preliminary inquiry. d. As to own motion investigations, those cases are referred from other agencies, such as District Attorneys, Inspector General, Office of the Attorney General and State Auditor General. (1) Own motion investigations are instituted at the direction of the Executive Director. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 7 e. If a full investigation is initiated after a preliminary inquiry, there is 180 days for completion, subject to two 90 day extensions. (1) A respondent receives notice of the investigation by letter advising of the allegations. f. No Commission member plays any role in the commencement or conduct of an investigation. g. j• p. (1) The Executive Director solely makes the decisions relative to investigations. The Logan Township cases were referred by the Office of Attorney General on or about October 5, 1994. (1) The docket date was on or about November 4, 1994 with the preliminary inquiry due on or about January 5, 1995. (a) The respondent was sent notice of the investigation on January 3, 1995. h. Two 90 day extensions were requested as to this investigation. i. 90 day notice letters providing an investigative status are sent in the regular course of the investigative proceedings. On December 20, 1995, a letter amending the original notice of investigation was sent as to case 94- 068 -C2. k. When Solicitor Clapper provided information which he believed supported investigating other individuals, Caruso informed Clapper that he could file sworn complaints. I. Both Caruso and the assigned investigator played a substantial role in drafting the Investigative Complaint. m. There is no opportunity for a respondent to reply to a 90 day extension request by the Investigative Division. n. State Ethics Commission investigators are to work with the law and obtain evidence without badgering people. o. Findings, unless irrelevant, are included in an investigators complaint to present the factual scenario. As to State Ethics Commission offices, the Investigative Division and Legal Division are across the hall from each other. (1) There is no common secretary between the two divisions except for the Executive Secretary who takes the Commission meeting minutes and works for the Executive Director. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 8 (2) The FAX machine and phone lines are shared by the Investigative Division and Legal Division. q. As to preliminary inquiries, a respondent would either receive notice of dismissal or of an investigation. 19. B. Kenneth Greider is the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors (PSATS). a. PSATS is a statewide association representing 1,457 townships in Pennsylvania. b. Annual conventions are held by PSATS in Hershey, Pennsylvania. (1) The convention is for educational purposes for township elective /appointive officials. c. Greider could find no documents where PSATS encouraged townships to pay for spouses /girlfriends expenses at the PSATS conventions. (1) There is nothing that explicitly states that spouses /friends' PSATS convention expenses can be paid by the township. d. The PSATS convention registration form contains a space for registering a guest. (1) The form requests a check (singular) in payment. e. PSATS July or August 1995 periodical contains a blurb regarding reimbursability of expenses for spouses at conventions. 20. Gregory Curran is a Special Investigator employed by the State Ethics Commission. a. As the assigned Investigator, Curran obtained documentation as to the allegations in the case. b. Curran prepared a chart, I Exhibit 12A, as to expenses of the Respondent and spouse or girlfriend for attending the annual PSATS convention. (1) At the Hershey Econo Lodge, there is an added charge of $15 per day for each additional person staying in the room. c. Green voted to approve bills at a January 3, 1991 meeting which included payment to PSATS for convention expenses. (1) At an April 18, 1991 meeting, Green voted to approve his expenses, including a payment of $341.78. d. Green took action at a June 4, 1992 meeting for the approval of payment to attend the PSATS convention. 21. John F. Benton is a CPA. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 9 a. Benton is the appointed accountant for Logan Township since 1984. b. No audit finding was made by Benton as to the PSATS convention expenses. 22. Larry Barton was a Supervisor in Logan Township from 1990 through 1995. a. Barton attended the 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1995 PSATS conventions. (1) Barton received reimbursement for the expenses of his wife for the years 1990 -1992. b. The Township Manager encouraged Barton to take his wife to the PSATS convention. c. When Barton took 2 of his 4 daughters to the PSATS convention in 1992, he did not seek reimbursement for their expenses. d. Barton suspended his own roadmaster's pay between October, 1990 and April, 1991. e. When Barton took office in 1990, taxes were raised. (1) Barton contributed a portion of his supervisor salary back to the general fund, beginning in July, 1991. f. As to the propriety of the receipt of Township paid insurance benefits, Barton elected to forfeit his roadmaster pay until such time as all of those benefits were fully paid. (1) The insurance benefits were fully repaid around July, 1991. g. Barton in mid -1991 directed that $171 per month be deducted from his pay to be placed in the general fund for necessary purposes. (1) Such action continued through the rest of Barton's term. h. When Barton learned that girlfriends convention expenses should not be paid by the Township, Barton requested Lewis to obtain a record of all convention expenses paid for his wife. (1) Barton wrote a check to Logan Township in the amount of $321.90 as a payment for his wife's PSATS convention expenses. (a) Such action was taken by Barton before he received notice of this investigation. At the PSATS convention, Barton's wife was a registered guest. Barton states that he has no record of receiving the 90 day status letter from the Investigative Division for July, 1995. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 10 k. The Township paid $35 for Barton's wife's PSATS convention registration for the 1991 -1992 years. I. Barton voted to approve the convention expenses he submitted to the Township. m. The letter which questioned the payment of PSATS convention expenses for girlfriends was discussed among the Supervisors. 23. James Green was a Logan Township Supervisor who is currently retired on disability. a. Green was not yet married to his wife when he took her to the PSATS conventions in 1991 -1992. b. Green sought reimbursement of his fiancee's convention expenses from the Township. (1) The Township Manager advised the Supervisors to seek reimbursement. (2) Green did not have all meals with his fiancee. c. As to the meetings that Green voted for the reimbursement for himself, the votes were 3 -0. d. In 1993, when there was a wage freeze for Logan Township employees, Green decided to forego his wage for the rest of the year. e. Approval of convention expenses were voted with a block of bills. f. Logan Township paid for the PSATS guest registration expenses of Green's current wife in 1991 -1992. g. I Exhibit 11A, page 2, represents the breakfast payment for Green's current wife during the PSATS conventions. (1) I Exhibit 6B, page 4, includes a meal expense for Green's current wife at the PSATS conventions. (a) Page 3 represents a meal bill of $163.36 for 7 people at New York Steak and Seafood. (1) The bill was for Green and six other people. h. Green also took his wife to the PSATS convention in 1993 but did not submit any expenses for her. i. Green was probably aware of the letter, R Exhibit 32, which questioned the submission of PSATS expenses for girlfriends. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 11 24. James Patterson has been a Logan Township Supervisor since January, 1990. a. Patterson took a guest to the PSATS convention in 1992 and 1993 who was his fiancee and then his wife in 1994. (1) The Township Manager encouraged Patterson to take his girlfriend. b. Patterson submitted reimbursement for his fiancee /wife's PSATS convention expenses. c. As a Supervisor, Patterson did not receive compensation of $642 to which he was entitled due to an error on the manager's part. d. In 1994, Patterson paid PSATS directly for the expenses of his wife. e. As Secretary /Treasurer of Logan Township, Patterson performed services but did not accept any compensation. f. Logan Township paid the $35 guest registration for Patterson's fiancee in 1992. (1) Patterson voted to approve that payment along with the bills. g. In 1994, Logan Township paid the $55 PSATS guest registration for Patterson's wife. h. Patterson voted to approve his PSATS convention expenses for 1992- 1994. (1) Patterson voted to approve the payment along with a block of bills. I Exhibit 7B, page 5, reflects a bill for Patterson's fiancee at the PSATS convention in the amount of $45 which was paid by Logan Township. I Exhibit 11B, page 2, reflects a bill for Patterson's guest at the PSATS convention in the amount of $13.07. k. For the 1993 PSATS convention, the $90 room deposit for convention expenses was divided with $45 for Patterson and $45 for his guest. I. Patterson was aware of the letter received by the Township which questioned the expenses of persons other than Supervisors at the PSATS conventions. (1) Patterson continued to submit such expenses for the 1993 and 1994 PSATS conventions. C. Stipulations 25. For the years 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994, due to a clerical error of some type, the Supervisors for Logan Township were underpaid in an amount of $200.00 Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 12 for each of those years. They had no knowledge of it and it wasn't discovered until mid -1994. 26. Barton, who became a Supervisor in 1990, was originally provided with insurance benefits. At some point in time, Barton submitted a letter to Logan Township requesting that those benefits be discontinued. 27. Barton submitted a payment in excess of $300.00 to the Township as to reimbursement for 1994 PSATS convention expenses. 28. Patterson was reimbursed for his wife's convention expenses for his wife's guest trip in 1993 in the amount of $22.00. 29. I Exhibits 13A, B and C and 14A, B and C are accurate recaps of the amounts alleged to have been improperly reimbursed to Patterson and Barton. D. Documents 30. ID Exhibits 1A-1C inter alia, are photocopies of the letters advising of the undertaking of an investigation as to specified allegations. 31. ID Exhibits 2A -2C include photocopies of two sets of 90 day extension requests and orders of approval as to the investigation of the above Respondent. 32. ID Exhibits 3A -3C are photocopies of 90 day notice letters as to the above Respondent. 33. ID Exhibit 5A is a photocopy of the minutes of the Logan Township Board of Supervisors for the calendar year 1990 with check registers and miscellaneous documents. a. At the January 2, 1990 meeting, upon motion of Barton, second by Patterson, unanimously carried, all three Supervisors, the Manager and Solicitor were given approval to attend the annual convention. b. At the February 15, 1990 Board meeting, James Servello inquired as to whether the Supervisors are only entitled to $2,600.00 meeting pay. (1) The response from the Board was that the solicitor would research the issue, and if there was an overpayment, funds would be returned to the township. c. The May 3, 1990 meeting reflects a report on the State Convention attendance by the three Supervisors and Manager with a consensus that the Convention was informative and productive. d. At the May 17, 1990 meeting, a motion by Patterson, second by Green, unanimously passed (Barton), to approve bills totalling $32,571 .66. (1) James B check Green t in the amount of $459.42 reflects with the description "convention." Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 13 e. The May 29, 1990 meeting minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, for the approval of bills totalling $83,265.45. (1) The check register of May 29, 1990 reflects a payment to James A. Patterson in the amount of $291.87 with the description "Convention /exps." f. At the August 13, 1990 Board meeting, Barton abstained as to the payment of bills due to a possible conflict as a salaried employee of Motorola Corporation. The September 27, 1990 meeting minutes reflect a motion by Barton, second by Patterson, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills totalling $141,926.53. g. (1) The check register reflects a payment to James A. Patterson in the amount of $45.60 with the description "convention." h. At the October 4, 1990 meeting, a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously carried (Green), to pay bills totalling $60,752.46. (1) The check register of October 3, 1990 reflects payments among others as follows: (a) James B. Green $417.44 (b) Lawrence C. Barton, II $444.94 (c) James A. Patterson $417.44 The Board meeting minutes of October 18, 1990, November 1, 1990, December 6, 1990, and December 13, 1990 reflect that Barton abstained as to the payment of the monthly bills due to a possible conflict. There is no authorization by the Board of Supervisors for the payment of PSATS convention expenses within the minutes for 1990 . (1) The Board, as noted above, did approve motions to pay bills. 34. ID Exhibit 5B is a photocopy of the minutes of the Logan Township Board of Supervisors for the calendar year 1991 with check registers and miscellaneous documents. a. At the January 7., 1991 Board meeting, a motion by Green, second by Barton, unanimously passed, to authorize delegates to attend the annual convention. b. The minutes of the March 7, 1991 Board meeting reflect that a motion by Patterson, second by Green, passed to approve the payment of bills in the amount of $143,248.04. (1) The check register reflects payments as follows: Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 14 9. (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $193.38 (b) James B. Green $418.06 (c) James A. Patterson $418.06 c. At the April 11 1 1991 Board meeting, Supervisors Barton, Patterson and Green reported that their attendance at the State Convention proved useful in performing their duties as Supervisors. d. The minutes of the April 18, 1991 meeting reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills in the amount of $45,959.20. (1) The check register reflects payments as follows: (a) Larry Barton, $331.08 with description "convention." (b) James B. Green, $341.78 with description "convention." e. The Board meeting minutes of April 25, 1991 reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills totalling $107,311.17. (1) The check register reflects a payment to James A. Patterson in the amount of $380.38 with the description "convention." f. At the July 11, 1991 Board meeting, a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills in the amount of $107,708.12. (1) The check register of June 28, 1991 reflects payments as follows: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.21 (b) James B. Green $418.06 (c) James A. Patterson $418.06 At the October 17, 1991 Board meeting, Barton abstained as to the bill approval for Motorola due to a possible conflict. h. The minutes of November 14, 1991 reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Green, passed unanimously, to pay bills totalling $187,679.78. (1) The check register dated November 8, 1991 reflects payments as follows: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $326.78 (b) James B. Green $410.47 Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 15 (c) James A. Patterson $410.47 i. There is no authorization by the Board of Supervisors for the payment of PSATS convention expenses within the minutes for 1991. (1) The Board, as noted above, did approve motions to pay bills. 35. ID Exhibit 5C is a photocopy of the minutes of the Logan Township Board of Supervisors for the calendar year 1992 with check registers and miscellaneous documents. a. The January 6, 1992 Board meeting minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to authorize attendance at the annual convention of the Supervisors, Secretary - Treasurer and Solicitor. b. As to the March 5, 1992 Board meeting, the minutes reflect that Barton abstained as to the bill approval for Sound Electronics due to a possible conflict. c. The minutes for April 2, 1992 reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton who abstained from voting on Sound Electronics due to a possible conflict, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills in the amount of $126,729.99. (1) The check register for March 31, 1992 reflects payments as follows: (a) Larry Barton in the amount of $47.83 with the description "convention." (b) James B. Green in the amount of $47.83 with the description "convention." (c) James A. Patterson in the amount of $47,83 with the description "convention." d. The April 16, 1992 Board meeting minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed, to approve bills totalling $68,423.83. (1) The check register for April 15, 1992 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $342.11 (b) James B. Green $427.64 (c) James A. Patterson $427.64 e. The minutes of the April 23, 1992 Board meeting reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to approve the payment of bills totalling $46,078.19. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 16 g. (1) The check register reflects a payment to Patterson in the amount of $377.32 with a description "convention." f. The May 14, 1992 minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton who abstained as to a bill of Sound Electronics, unanimously passed (Green), to approve bills of $285,543.85. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement relative to his abstention noting his salaried position with Motorola Corporation. (2) The check register reflects a payment to Barton in the amount of $317.36 with the description "convention." (3) The check register of May 12, 1992 reflects a payment to Patterson in the amount of $15.81 with the description "refund /supplies." The Board meeting minutes of June 4, 1992 reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously enacted (Green), to approve the payment of bills in the amount of $78,272.89. (1) The check register of June 2, 1992 reflects a payment to Green in the amount of $405.92 with the description "convention." h. The July 30, 1992 Board minutes reflect an abstention by Barton as to the approval of the bills for Sound Electronics due to a possible conflict. The August 6, 1992 Board meeting minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills totalling $65,912.23. (1) The check register includes the following payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $343.28 (b) James B. Green $429.26 (c) James A. Patterson $429.26 J• The minutes of the September 3, 1992 meeting reflect a Patterson, second by Green, unanimously passed (Barton), to the amount of $106,017.22. (1) Barton abstained and filed a Disclosure Statement approval of a bill from Motorola. The check register for September 8, 1992 reflects a payment to Green in the amount of $163.58 with a description "travel /seminar." (2) motion by pay bills in as to the k. The September 10, 1992 minutes reflect a motion by Barton, second by Patterson, unanimously passed (Green), to approve the payment of bills totalling $80,621.64. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 17 (1) The check register reflects a payment to Patterson in the amount of $7.35 with the description "duplicate keys." The Board meeting minutes of September 17, 1992 reflect a motion by Barton, second by Patterson, unanimously passed (Green), to pay bills totalling $31,497.91. (1) Barton abstained and read a disclosure as to Sound Electronics. (2) The check register reflects payments: (a) Larry Barton, $49.00, with the description "convention." (b) James A. Patterson, $49.00, with the description "convention." m. The minutes of the Board meeting of October 1, 1992 reflects a motion by Patterson, second by Barton, who abstained as to the Fornwalt invoice, unanimously enacted (Green), to approve bills in the amount of $1 12,596.91. (1) The check register of October 6, 1992 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $256.48 (b) James B. Green $429.26 (c) James A, Patterson $429.26 n. There is no authorization by the Board of Supervisors for the payment of PSATS convention expenses within the minutes for 1992. (1) The Board, as noted above, did approve motions to pay bills. 36. ID Exhibit 5D is a photocopy of the minutes of the Logan Township Board of Supervisors for the calendar year 1993 with check registers and miscellaneous documents. a. At the January 4, 1993 Board meeting, delegates were authorized to attend the annual convention by motion which passed unanimously. (1) The check register for January 11, 1993 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, 1I $332.43 (b) James B. Green $429.26 (c) James A. Patterson $429.26 b. The January 14, 1993 minutes reflect a motion by Barton, second by Patterson, unanimously passed (Green), as to the approval of bills in the amount of $207,872.37. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 18 c. The minutes of the February 4, 1993 Board meeting reflect a motion by Green, second by Barton, with abstentions as to a bill for Sound Electronics, for approval of bills totalling $119,410.61. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. (2) The check register for February 2, 1993 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $ 189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 d. The February 11, 1993 minutes reflect an abstention by Barton as to the bill approval for Sound Electronics. (1) The check register of March 2, 1993 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 e. The minutes of the March 25, 1993 Board meeting reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Green, unanimously passed (Barton), for the approval of bills totalling $26,51 1.08. (1) The check register of March 24, 1993 reflects a payment to Green in the amount of $38.40 with the description "convention." f. At the April 8, 1993 Board meeting, a motion was made by Green, second by Barton who abstained as to a Multicom invoice due to a possible conflict, unanimously passed, to pay bills of $206,864.45. g. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. (2) The check register reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 For the May 6, 1993 Board meeting, a motion by Barton, who abstained as to . a Sound Electronics invoice, second by Patterson, passed unanimously for bills totalling $111,621.03. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. (2) The check register reflects payments: Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 19 (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 h. The minutes of the May 20, 1993 meeting reflect a payment to Green of $234.52 with the description "convention exp." i. For the July 8, 1993 Board meeting, a motion by Barton, who abstained as to a Sound Electronics invoice, second by Patterson, passed unanimously for bills totalling $251,023.33. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. (2) The check register reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, H $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 For the September 9, 1993 Board meeting, motion by Barton, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Green), to pay bills totalling $87,959.79. (1) The check register for September 3, 1993 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 k. The minutes of the October 7, 1993 meeting reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Green, passed unanimously, to pay bills totalling $266,717.91 (1) The check register from October 6, 1993 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $ 189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 The November 4, 1993 meeting minutes reflect a motion by Green, second by Patterson, unanimously passed (Barton), with the abstention of Barton as to Sound Electronics due to a possible conflict, for bills of $108,710.19 and $71,050.63. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 20 (2) The check register reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 m. For the December 2, 1993 Board meeting, motion by Barton, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Green), to pay bills totalling $173,317.55 (1) The check register reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, 1I $332.43 (b) James B. Green $189.98 (c) James A. Patterson $425.26 (2) Payment to Patterson in the amount of $566.49 with the description "convention exp. reimb. misc. exp." n. There is no authorization by the Board of Supervisors for the payment of PSATS convention expenses within the minutes for 1993. (1) The Board, as noted above, did approve motions to pay bills. 37. ID Exhibit 5E is a photocopy of the minutes of the Logan Township Board of Supervisors for the calendar year 1994 with check registers and miscellaneous documents. a. The minutes of the January 3, 1994 Board meeting reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously, to authorize delegates to attend the annual convention. b. At the January 6, 1994 Board meeting, motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), with the abstention of Barton as to Sound Electronics, for the payment of bills totalling $94,697.93. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. c. The March 10, 1994 Board meeting minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), for the payment of bills totalling $149,755.65. (1) Check register reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton II $332.43 (b) James A. Patterson $425.26 Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 21 d. For the March 31, 1994 meeting, motion by Albright, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Barton), to pay bills totalling $ 151,723.67. (1) The check register indicates a payment to Patterson in the amount of $134.28 with the description "Spr. Convention Travel Expenses." e. At the April 7, 1994 Board meeting, motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), for bills totalling $184,836.83. (1) The check register for April 6, 1994 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James A. Patterson $425.26 f. The May 12, 1994 Board minutes indicate motion by Albright, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Barton), for bills totalling $133,210.98. (1) The check register for May 9, 1994 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James A. Patterson $425.26 g. For the July 7, 1994 Board meeting, the minutes indicate a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), except as to the abstention of Barton as to the Sound Electronics bill due to a possible conflict, for the payment of bills totalling $223,043.89. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. (2) The check register for July, 1994 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $332.43 (b) James A. Patterson $425.26 h. The minutes for the July 14, 1994 Board meeting indicate a motion by Albright, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Barton), subject to an abstention by Barton as to Sound Electronics due to a possible conflict, for the approval of bills totalling $47,356.86. (1) The check register for July 1 5, 1994 reflects a payment to Patterson of $416.10 with the description "Convention exp." The Board minutes for August 4, 1994 indicate a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously, for the payment of bills totalling $126,166.95. (1) The check register for August 1, 1994 reflects payments: Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 22 (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $347.20 (b) James A. Patterson $437.53 At the September 8, 1994 Board meeting, the minutes reflect a motion by Albright, second by Barton, passed unanimously, to approve the payment of bills totalling $215,329.52. (1) The check register for September 7, 1994 indicates payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $347.20 (b) James A. Patterson $437.53 k. The Board minutes for October 6, 1994 indicate a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), for the payment of bills totalling $348,896.46. (1) The check register for October 4, 1994 reflects payments: (a) Lawrence C. Barton, II $347.20 (b) James A. Patterson $437.53 (2) The check register reflects a payment to Barton in the amount of $39.65 with the description "Fall Convention." At the October 20, 1994 Board meeting, the minutes reflect a motion by Patterson, second by Albright, passed unanimously (Barton), except as to abstention by Barton as to a bill of Sound Electronics, for the payment of bills totalling $170,705.07. (1) Barton filed a Disclosure Statement. m. There is no authorization by the Board of Supervisors for the payment of PSATS convention expenses within the minutes for 1994. (1) The Board, as noted above, did approve motions to pay bills. 38. ID Exhibits 6A and 6B are a series of documents relating to reimbursements claimed by Green for the 1991/1992 PSATS Conventions. a. For the 1991 Convention, Green received a payment of $341.78 based upon claimed expenses of hotel, $44.06; meals, $200.37; and travel, $97.35. (1) The hotel bill reflects an advance deposit of $90. (2) There is no breakdown of the meal expenses per person. b. For the 1992 Convention, Green received a payment of $405.92 based upon claimed expenses of travel, $94.05; hotel, $148.27; and meals, $ 163.60. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 23 (1) The hotel bill indicates a cash (advance) of $45 (amount smudged). (2) There is no breakdown of the meal expenses per person. 39. ID Exhibits 7A -C are a group of documents as to Patterson's claimed reimbursements for expenses at the 1992 -1994 PSATS Conventions. a. In 1992, Patterson received a payment of $377.32 based upon claimed expenses of hotel, $185.77; gratuity, $10; mileage, $ 100.89; and meals, $80.66. (1) The hotel bill reflects a $45 credit. (2) There is no breakdown of the meal expenses per person. b. In 1993, Patterson received a payment of $521.49 based upon claimed expenses of hotel, $288.11; mileage, $102.48; and meals, $130.70. (1) The hotel bill reflects a $45 credit. (2) There is no breakdown of the meal expenses per person. (3) The reimbursement received by Patterson included a charge of $74.78, after a $45 credit, for a room for Theresa Fahr. c. In 1994, Patterson received claimed reimbursement of $416.10 consisting of hotel of $135.35 (after $90 cash advance), meals of $173.79, and mileage of $106.96. (1) There is no breakdown of meals on a per person basis. 40. ID Exhibits 8A -C are a series of documents relating to the attendance by Barton at the PSATS Conventions in 1990 -1992. a. For the 1990 Convention, Barton received a claimed reimbursement of $207.62 based upon mileage of $92.82, hotel bill of $139.15, and meals /tips of $55.65. (1) The hotel bill reflects a $90 credit. (2) There is no breakdown of meals on a per person basis. b. For the 1991 Convention, Barton received a claimed reimbursement of $321.08 based upon mileage of $97.35, hotel bill of $141.67, meals /tips of $86.96, and turnpike fees of $5.10. (1) The hotel bill reflects a $90 credit. (2) There is no breakdown of meals on a per person basis. c. For the 1992 Convention, Barton received a claimed reimbursement of $317.36 based upon mileage of $97.47, hotel bill of $201.55, Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 24 meals /tips of $34.39, and turnpike fees of $3.95 with a $20 requested reduction in reimbursement by Barton to exclude meals of his children. (1) The hotel bill reflects a $90 credit. (2) There is no breakdown of meals on a per person basis. 41. ID Exhibit 9A is a group of documents reflecting payments by Logan Township as to the PSATS Conventions in 1990. a. A payment was made for Barton in the amount of $195 which included a motel deposit of $90, delegate registration of $70 and guest registration of $35. b. For Green and Patterson together, a payment of $320 was made comprising a $180 deposit for two rooms and $140 for two delegate registrations. 42. ID Exhibit 9B is a payment by Logan Township in the amount of $710 for "Convention Res." in 1991. 43. ID Exhibit 9C is a series of documents indicating payments by Logan Township for the 1992 PSATS Convention. a. A payment was made for Green in the amount of $195 consisting of delegate registration of $70, guest registration of $35, and '$90 room deposit. b. A payment was made for Patterson in the amount of $195 consisting of delegate registration of $70, guest registration of $35, and $90 room deposit. c. A payment was made for Barton in the amount of $195 consisting of delegate registration of $70, guest registration of $35, and $90 room deposit. 44. ID Exhibit 9D consists of a group of documents reflecting payments for the 1993 PSATS Convention. a. A $112 payment was made for Green consisting of a $ 90 room deposit and guest program of $22. b. A $215 payment was made for Barton consisting of a $80 delegate registration, $45 guest registration and $90 room deposit. c. A $237 payment was made for Patterson consisting of a $80 delegate registration, $45 guest registration, $90 room deposit, and $22 guest program. 45. ID Exhibit 9E is a series of documents relating to a payment for the 1994 PSATS Convention from Logan Township in the amount of $775 for Barton, Patterson and others. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 25 a. Included is a $25 guest program for Theresa Patterson. 46. ID Exhibit 10 is documents relating to financial matters as to hotels relative to the PSATS Conventions in 1990 -1994. a. For the applicable time period, the differential between one and two persons staying in the same room was $10 per day for Hotel Hershey and the Marriott with $5 for each additional person at Hotel Hershey, $5 for the Hershey Econo Lodge, and $8 for the Hershey Lodge. 47. ID Exhibit 1 1 A reflects a charge of $10.07 for breakfast for Green's guest at the 1992 PSATS Convention which was billed to Green's room for which Green received reimbursement. 48. ID Exhibit 11 B reflects a charge of $ 10.07 for breakfast for Patterson at the 1992 PSATS Convention which was billed to Patterson's room for which Patterson received reimbursement. a. A guest meal charge (Theresa Fahr) of $10.07 was reimbursed to Patterson. b. An additional guest meal charge (Theresa Fahr) of $20.14 for two people occurred on April 7, 1992. (1) One of the two identical breakfast buffets for Fahr amounted to $10.07. 49. ID Exhibit 11C reflects three charges of $79.18, $20.67 to Patterson and $20.67 (Theresa Fahr - 2 breakfasts) which were billed to Patterson's room for the 1993 PSATS Convention as to which Patterson received reimbursement. a. One of the two identical breakfast buffets for Fahr amounted to $10.33. 50. Exhibit R -2 is a group of documents for Barton for the years 1991 -1994 as to compensation from Logan Township. 51. Exhibit R -3 is a group of documents for Green for the years 1991 -1993 as to compensation from Logan Township. 52. Exhibit R -4 is a group of documents for Patterson for the years 1990 -1994 as to compensation from Logan Township. 53. Exhibit R -6 is the minutes of the Auditors from January 3, 1990 which reflect that the auditors would not audit the Township that year. a. The auditors fixed compensation inter alia for the PSATS Convention at the "reimbursement of expenses." 54. Exhibit R -7 is the Auditors minutes for January 18, 1991 which set forth the compensation of supervisors when acting as township employees. 55. Exhibit R -8 is the Auditors minutes of January 7, 1992 which set forth the compensation rate for supervisors when employed by the township. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 26 56. Exhibit R -9 is the Auditors minutes for January 5, 1993 which set forth the compensation of supervisors when acting as township employees. 57. Exhibit R -10 is the Auditors minutes of January 11, 1994 which set forth the compensation rate for supervisors when employed by the township. 58. Exhibit R -12 is additional documents completing the minutes of the Board for May 3, 1990 reflecting motion by Patterson, second by Barton, unanimously passed (Green), for bills totalling $130,920,74. a. The check register of May 2, 1990 indicates payments: ( 1 ) Lawrence C. Barton, I I (2) James A. Patterson (3) James B. Green $444.94 $417.44 $417.44 59. Exhibit R -16 is additional documents for the Board meeting minutes of June 4, 1992 indicating motion by Patterson, second by Barton, passed unanimously (Green), to approve bills totalling $78,272.89. a. The check register of June 1, 1992 indicates payments: (1) Lawrence C. Barton, II (2) James B. Green (3) James A. Patterson $342.11 $427.64 $427.64 60. Exhibit R -18 is additional documents of the minutes for July 14, 1994 indicating a motion by Albright, second by Patterson, passed unanimously (Barton), except for Barton's abstention as to Sound Electronics for the approval of bills totalling $47,356.86. a. A Disclosure Statement was filed by Barton. 61. Exhibit R -21 is a letter from Barton dated August 30,1990 to the Township Secretary directing the discontinuance of life, health and death benefits effective September 1, 1990. 62. Exhibit R -22 is a letter dated October 22, 1990 from Barton to the Township Secretary directing the suspension of his roadmaster pay, effective October 1, 1990. 63. Exhibit R -23 is a letter from Barton dated April 16, 1991 to the Township Secretary reflecting his direction to credit roadmaster payments for the prepayment of medical benefit premiums for the period of January 1, 1990 through August 31, 1990. 64. Exhibit R -24 is a photocopy of a check from Barton dated May 4, 1994 to Logan Township in the amount of $321.90 with the notation "convention reimbursement. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 27 65. Exhibit R -32 is a letter dated December 29, 1992 from Stephen D. Wicks to Randal R. Rhoads relating to a settlement proposal between Noye and Logan Township. a. The letter contains a list of "recriminations ", one of which states: (1) ". . . Alleged violation of township resolution for payment of convention expenses by Supervisors Green and Patterson by taking girlfriends (rather than spouses) to convention at township expense." 66. Exhibit R -33 is a photocopy of a check dated March 1, 1994 from Patterson to Logan Township in the amount of $25 with the notation "Harbor Inn." 67. The following expenses relate to Green's girlfriend /fiancee which were not authorized for the PSATS Convention for which Green received reimbursement. a. 1991 b. 1992 Item (1) Guest lodging (2) Guest registration (3) Guest meals (4) Guest program Amount Description $15 Additional charge for 2nd person in room @ $5 /day for three days $35 Charge for guest at convention * Meal bills for guest Charge for program activity for guest Item Amount Description (1) Guest lodging None Additional charge for 2nd person in room (2) Guest registration $35 Charge for guest at convention (3) Guest meals $10.07* Meal bills for guest (4) Guest program None Charge for program activity for guest * Meal receipts in Respondent's name for two or more persons are incapable of determination as to any unauthorized expenses. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 28 III. DISCUSSION: At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, James Green, hereinafter Green, has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law 26, 65 P.S. §401, The issue before us is whether Green violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 regarding the allegation that he used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit consisting of the receipt of expense reimbursements for a companion who attended the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors (PSATS) Conventions. Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 provides as follows: 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). The term "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 9 of 1989 as follows: facts. 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 or his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. 65 P.S. §402. Having noted the issue and applicable law, we shall now summarize the salient Green served as a Supervisor in Logan Township from 1988 through 1993 and was employed by the Township as a Roadmaster. The Logan Township Supervisors attend the annual Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors (PSATS) conventions. Consistent with the Township practice and with the encouragement of the former Township Manager, the Supervisors have taken companions to the PSATS conventions. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 29 Prior to attending each annual PSATS convention, the Board of Supervisors, usually took action at the January reorganizational meeting to authorize attendance. The minutes of the meetings in which such authorizations occurred do not contain any agreement for the payment of expenditures for guests at the PSATS conventions. After the Supervisors attended the PSATS convention, expense reimbursement requests were submitted to the Township Board of Supervisors who voted to pay such expenses. The practice of the Township paying the PSATS convention expenses for "girlfriends" was questioned in a letter dated December 29, 1992 which was received from the legal counsel of the former Township Manager who raised, inter alia, an issue of a possible legal violation by Supervisors as to such action. Thereafter, discussions ensued among the Supervisors and Barton made a payment in the amount of $321.90 by check dated May 4, 1992 to the Township with the notation "convention reimbursement." The record reflects that for the relevant time periods Green took his fiancee to the annual PSATS convention with her expenses paid by the township. A detailed listing of the companion expenses is set forth in Fact Finding 67. Separate and apart from the above, we note that Green as a Supervisor did not take all of the compensation to which he was entitled. See Fact Findings 23, 25. However, as to the PSATS convention expenses for his companion, it is clear that Green received reimbursement for such companion expenses (quantifiable) as follows: $50 in 1991 and $45.07 in 1992. The following arguments have been raised by the Respondent in seeking a dismissal of this action: such reimbursement is authorized by the Code; the companion expenses were approved by the Township Board; no audit findings were made as to the convention expenses; a finding of violation would be a usurpation of legislative authority; there was no use of authority of office; reimbursements were received by other individuals from Logan Township; the Supervisors were advised by the former Township Manager that such practice was legal; there is no violation because the practice began before Green became a Supervisor and before the enactment of Act 9; the financial gain is not quantifiable and in any event is de minimis; and there was selective prosecution, disparate treatment and prosecutorial vindictiveness. The above issues will be addressed seriatim. As to the Code, it authorized certain convention expenses for the delegates but not as to a companion. Further, although the Code allowed for the payment of "other" actual expenses that a Township Board would agree to pay, there was no authorization by the Township Board to pay any other delegate expenses but merely action to authorize the Supervisors to attend the conventions. An after - the -fact reimbursement of expenses as part of a group of bills which included PSATS convention companion expenses did not and could not constitute an agreement by the Township Board to pay such expenses. The fact that a CPA in conducting an audit of Logan Township did not generate any findings as to PSATS convention expenses is totally irrelevant as to the issue of whether the receipt of such reimbursement for companion expenses was violative of the Ethics Law. Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 30 As to the argument that a finding of violation would be a usurpation of a legislative function of the General Assembly, this Commission is empowered and directed to investigate cases where public officials /employees have used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit. 65 P.S. §407, 408. As to the issue of use of authority of office, but for the fact that Green was a Supervisor, he would not have been in a position to authorize the attendance of the Supervisors, go the PSATS convention and submit and collect reimbursement for the expenses of his companion through action of the Board of Supervisors. The fact that almost all votes by the Supervisors in approving reimbursements for convention expenses were 3 -0 unanimous votes did not negate a use of authority of office which encompasses more diverse actions than merely voting. Juliante, Order 809. If others in Logan Township received similar reimbursement, any possible violation of the Ethics Law by those individuals would not serve as a defense in this action. The appropriate procedure would be to file a complaint against those individual(s) with the Investigative Division. As to the advice from the former Township Manager to the Supervisors that it was legal to have the township pay for a guest at the PSATS convention, nowhere in the Ethics Law does the advice of a layperson provide a defense. Turning to the argument that the expense reimbursements occurred before Green became a Supervisor and Act 9 was enacted, it is clear that the actionable conduct in this case occurred after the enactment of Act 9 of 1989 for the relevant years in issue. This is not a situation where one actionable event occurred in the past as in McGuire and Marchitello v. SEC, 657 A.2d 1346 (1995). Each year in which the Board authorized the attendance at the PSATS convention with the Supervisors taking companions at Township expense was a new occurrence. Regarding the issue of whether the financial gain is quantifiable or de minimis, we will defer that discussion since it directly involves the substantive allegation before us. Lastly, Respondents argue that they have been selectively prosecuted. We reject this argument as without merit. There is no indication that the Respondents were intentionally and purposefully singled out for prosecution for an invidious reason." See, Comm. v. Butler, 367 Pa.Super. 453, 461 -462, 533 A.2d 105, 109 (Pa.Super. 1987) (Emphasis added) (Citing Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 608, 150 S.Ct. 1524, 1531, 84 L.Ed.2d 547 (1985)), aff'd. 529 Pa. 7, 601 A.2d 268 (1991)). As to the claim that there was a taking or destruction of records /property of Logan Township by an SEC Investigator, the record clearly belies such an assertion. Factually, when a great deal of Township records were being photocopied, an original appeared in a pile of photocopies. It is clear to us that such action occurred, not out of any attempt to take a Township record, but through mishap given the large amount of documents being photocopied. Finally, the assertion that the counsel to the Investigative Division engaged in "outrageous" or "below the belt" conduct is nonsensical based upon our review of the record. Any inappropriate conduct by counsel which has occurred was not by the legal staff of this Commission. It is also argued that Czekaj, Order 930, Geiss, Order 967, and Reilly, Order 966, support a finding of no violation of the Ethics Law. Those three cases were all consent orders which substantively have no relevance to the issue before us. Green 94- 066 -C2 Page 31 Since the above arguments raised by Respondent have no merit, we reject them for the reasons stated. We must now determine whether the actions of Green violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989. In order to establish a violation, Section 3(a) requires a use of the authority of office or confidential information by a public official /employee for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family, or business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. We have held that use of authority of office is not merely limited to making motions and voting. Juliante, supra. To determine whether a violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred, we must review the Code. It is necessary for us to review that provision of law in order to determine whether these Township paid expenses for companions of the Supervisors at the PSATS conventions were authorized in law. If there is a statutory authorization for such expenses, then the pecuniary benefit received would not be private; however, if there is no authorization, then it would be a financial gain other than compensation provided for by law and hence a private pecuniary benefit. The Code which was applicable for these relevant time periods provided as follows: §65612. Expenses and Mileage. The expenses allowed the delegates attending the annual meeting shall be limited to the registration fee, mileage for use of a personal vehicle or reimbursement of actual transportation expense going to and returning from such meeting plus all other actual expenses that the township board of supervisors may have agreed to pay. Every delegate attending the annual meeting shall submit to the township board of supervisors an itemized account of expenses incurred thereat. The township board of supervisors may authorize township employees to be compensated at their regular employe rate during their attendance at the annual meeting. No delegate shall receive expenses for more than four days including the time employed in traveling thereto and therefrom, together with mileage going to and returning from such meeting. 53 P.S. §65612. As previously noted, the above quoted provision of law provided for certain enumerated expenses allowable to the delegates plus "other actual expenses" that a Township Board agrees to pay. Although we are dubious as to whether companion expenses could be authorized as other actual expenses allowable to a delegate, we need not reach the question because there was no action by the Township Board to authorize the payment of the PSATS convention expenses as to companions of the Supervisors. Parenthetically, PSATS, which is the lobbying association for township supervisors, takes the position that the convention expenses for a guest of a supervisor are not reimbursable: Green, 94- 066 -C2 Page 32 Q: May the township pay the expenses of a guest who attends the PSATS state convention with a delegate? A: No. Under Section 612 of the Township Code, a township may only reimburse expenses incurred by its delegates to the convention. Pennsylvania Township News, August 1995 at 70. There has been action by Green who used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself consisting of the Township paid expenses for his fiancee. The use of authority of office consisted of action in taking his fiancee to the PSATS convention, incurring the expenses, submitting the reimbursement, participating in the payment of the reimbursement and cashing the reimbursement check, all of which actions would not have occurred but for the fact that Green is a Logan Township Supervisor. As to the involvement of Green as a Supervisor regarding the authorization to attend or payment of expenses for the PSATS conventions, see Fact Findings 34, 35. That use of authority of office resulted in a private pecuniary benefit as noted above based upon our analysis of the Code as it impacts upon the Ethics Law. Lastly, that private pecuniary benefit enured to the benefit of Green. It is clear that there was no intent on the part of Green to violate the Ethics Law. This case is simply one where a public official has submitted an expense reimbursement and claimed a certain amount of money to which he is not entitled based upon a mistaken belief as to propriety. Although the receipt of the expense reimbursement for the traveling companion is clearly not authorized in law and would form the basis for finding a violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989, we note that for the years in issue, the amounts were de minimis under the facts and circumstances of this particular case. As previously noted, the quantifiable expenses for Green's companion were $50 in 1991 and $45.07 in 1992. The Ethics Law contains an exclusion to the definition of conflict as to actions which are de minimis. The term "de minimis" is defined as follows: Section 2. Definitions "De minimis economic impact." An economic consequence which has an insignificant effect. 65 P.S. §402. Therefore, we find that Green did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 as to his receipt of reimbursement expenses consisting of Township paid expenses for a traveling companion in that such amounts were de minimis. Schweinsberq, Order 900. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. James Green, as a Logan Township Supervisor, is a public official subject to the provision of Act 9 of 1989. 2. Green did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself consisting of the Township paid expenses for a traveling companion at the annual PSATS convention in that such expenses were de minimis. In Re: James Green File Docket: 94- 066 -C2 Date Decided: 8/27/96 Date Mailed: 9/13/96 ORDER NO. 1022 1. Green, as a Logan Township Supervisor, did not violate Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he used the authority of office to obtain a private pecuniary benefit for himself consisting of the Township paid expenses for a traveling companion at the annual PSATS convention in that such expenses were de minimis. BY THE COMMISSION, �� DANEEN E. REESE, CHAIR