Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1071 RuntasIn Re: Gerald Runtas STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 File Docket: X -ref: Date Decided: Date Mailed: Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair Austin M. Lee, Vice Chair Allan M. Kluger Boyd E. Wolff Julius Uehlein 96- 057 -C2 1071 1/14/98 1/26/98 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 et seg., by the above - named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegation. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was not filed and a hearing was deemed waived. The record is complete. A Consent Agreement was submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration which was subsequently approved. 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. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That Gerald Runtas, a public official in his capacity as a Supervisor for Robinson Township, Washington County, violated the following provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 9 of 1989) when he used the authority of his position for a private pecuniary benefit by submitting hours for compensation as township roadmaster which were not related to this position and when he participated in approving payments to himself. Section 3. Restricted Activities (a) No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 P.S. §403(a). Section 2. Definitions "Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of 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. §402. II. FINDINGS: 1. Gerald Runtas has served as a Supervisor for Robinson Township, Washington County, since 1974. a. Runtas has been employed full -time by the Township as Roadmaster since 1986. b. The other Supervisors, George Lucchino and Calvin Dewey, serve as part- time Roadmasters. 2. Robinson Township Reorganization Meeting minutes confirm that motions were approved appointing Supervisors as Roadmasters between 1994 and 1996. a. Runtas participated in Board actions to appoint Supervisors as Roadmasters. 3. During the January 3, 1994, Reorganization Meeting a motion was approved for Runtas to work forty (40) hours per week with no overtime pay but compensatory time for any overtime. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 3 a. During the January 3, 1995, and January 2, 1996, meetings, Runtas was again appointed Roadmaster. 4. During the Reorganization Meetings of January 3, 1995, and January 2, 1996, Runtas was appointed a Township employee along with other members of the Township road crew. a. The other Township Supervisors did not receive this appointment or designation. b. There is no distinction between Runtas' position as Roadmaster and Township employee. 5. In 1993 the Robinson Township Auditors set Runtas' salary as Roadmaster at $9.25 per hour. a. That rate remained the same in 1994 and 1995. 6. At the January 11, 1994, Auditors Meeting Township Supervisor George Lucchino advised the auditors that all three Supervisors were of equal power. a. Jerry Runtas was to work a maximum of forty (40) hours per week. b. Lucchino and Supervisor Dewey would work a maximum of twenty (20) hours per week except in an emergency. c. Any extra hours worked by the Supervisors would be paid by compensatory time. d. Equal pay was requested for all Supervisors. 7. On January 3, 1996, the Board of Auditors increased Runtas' salary to $9.75 per hour. 8. Runtas' duties as Roadmaster include supervising the Robinson Township road crew which consists of two full -time employees. a. The road department hours are 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, with a one -half hour lunch break. b. Runtas' duties as Roadmaster did not include attendance at meetings with the County Commissioners, the Local Sanitation Co -Op or Township Solicitor. 9. The Robinson Township road crew hours and duties performed are recorded on PennDOT (form MS -907) Municipal Weekly, Bi- Weekly or Semi - Monthly Payroll Reports. a. The road crew hours and duties performed are completed by Runtas. 10. Runtas submits Vehicle Expense Reports which disclose mileage traveled and the purpose of trips for which mileage reimbursement is being claimed. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 4 a. The date, purpose of trip, miles claimed, and tolls are recorded. b. The length of meetings are not recorded. 11. Runtas was compensated as Roadmaster for attending meetings and performing duties unrelated to his position as Roadmaster. 12. Runtas was compensated for traveling to meetings as disclosed on expense reports as follows: Date 05/10/94 10/31/94 11/04/94 Date 02/08/95 03/14/95 04/17/95 06/15/95 06/21/95 07/17/95 07/26/95 08/10/95 08/24/95 D ate 01/23/96 02/06/96 02/21/96 a. 1994 Location b. 1995 Location c. 1996 Wash. Co. Courthouse Courthouse Courthouse Courthouse Courthouse Courthouse Cty. Job Service Courthouse Courthouse Courthouse Office Max /Sears Sun TV Location Courthouse Courthouse 911 Office Purpose of Meeting 1994 Totals 1995 Totals 1996 Totals Summer Work Hearing Redev. Auth. 1.0 1.0 3.0 Purpose of Hours Comp. Meeting For Travel 911 Meeting Co. Commissioners Co. Commissioners Summer Work Pgm. Co. Commissioners Co. Commissioners Co. Commissioners Purch. for Twp. Bldg. Computer Purpose of Meeting Treasurer Tax Assessment FEMA Meeting Hours Comp. Rate of For Travel Pay 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 9.0 Hours Comp. For Travel 1.0 Off. 1.0 1.0 3.0 13. Runtas was compensated for travel time to meetings as follows: a. 1994: $ 27.75 $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $27.75 Rate of Pay $9.25 /hr $9.25/hr $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $9.25/hr $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $9.25 /hr $83.25 Rate of Pay $9.75/hr $9.75 /hr $9.75 /hr $29.25 Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 5 1995: 1996: $ 83.25 $ 29.25 $140.25 b. This does not include compensation received for actual meeting attendance. c. Runtas was compensated as Roadmaster for attendance at these meetings. 1. Length of meetings is not recorded. 14. Robinson Township is one of twenty -six municipalities who are members of a Local Co- Operative Sanitation Council (Council). a. The Council is the designated agency for the member municipalities, operating in conjunction with the PA Sewage Facilities Act, Act 537. b. The full Council, which consists of representatives of the member municipalities, meets at least one time per year, and averages three meetings per year. c. The Operating Committee, made up of seven members, meets monthly. 1. The Operating Committee is comprised of the elected officers and three appointed delegates. 2. Full Council meetings, held on an as needed basis, followed the Operating Committee Meetings. 15. The Robinson Township Supervisors annually appointed a delegate and alternate to the Council. a. In 1994, Supervisor Calvin Dewey was appointed Township Representative to the Sewage Council, with George Lucchino as alternate. b. In 1995, George Lucchino was the appointed Township Representative to the Sewage Council, with Calvin Dewey as alternate. c. In 1996, Supervisor Lucchino, was appointed Township Representative, with Gerald Runtas as alternate. 16. Meetings of the Local Co- Operative Sanitation Council are between one and two hours in duration. a. Meetings are held during the daylight hours. 17. Gerald Runtas attended two Council meetings in 1994 and 1995 even though he was neither a delegate nor alternate. a. Runtas attended meetings on February 4, 1994, and February 3, 1995. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 6 18. Runtas attended five meetings of the Council in 1996 as follows: 19. Beginning on March 8, 1996, Runtas used compensatory time or docked his hours on days that he attended meetings of the Sanitation Council. a. b. c. d. 1. Runtas was compensated as Roadmaster for one (1) hour travel time for each meeting and actual meeting attendance of one (1) hour for each at $9.25 per hour. 01/05/96 02/02/96 03/08/96 04/04/96 05/03/96 - 1.5 hour meeting, 1.0 hour travel - 2.5 hour meeting, 1.0 hour travel - 1.0 hour meeting, 1.0 hour travel - 1.0 hour meeting, 1.0 hour travel 1.0 hour meeting, 1.0 hour travel On 03/08/96 Runtas went to the Sanitation Council office to sign documents but did not stay for the meeting. Runtas worked 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m., left for the Council office, returned at 11:00 a.m. and worked until 3:00 p.m. Runtas was paid for eight hours on 03/08/96 confirming that he was not paid for his travel time or time spent at the Sanitation Council office. Runtas did not claim time as Roadmaster for attending meetings on April 4, 1996, and May 5, 1996. e. Runtas quit claiming time for meetings after questions were raised whether he could be compensated for meeting attendance. 20. Runtas was compensated as follows for attending the Local Co- Operative Council meetings: 02/04/94 - 2 hours @ $9.25 /hour = $18.50 02/03/95 - 2 hours @ $9.25 /hour = $18.50 01/05/96 - 1.5 hours @ $9.75 /hour = $14.63 02/02/96 - 2.5 hours @ $9.75 /hour = $24.38 Total $ 76.01 21. Attorney Robert Clarke has served as the Solicitor for the Robinson Township Board of Supervisors, from 1980 to the present. a. Clark's office is located in the City of Washington across from the Courthouse. b. Clarke is paid a retainer by Robinson Township. c. Clarke does not charge the Township for office conferences and does not keep detailed records of such conferences. d. Clarke charges Robinson Township an hourly rate when he is required to generate work. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 7 22. Runtas was paid as a Roadmaster when he attended office conferences with Solicitor Clarke, attended court hearings, and participated in hearing preparation with Clarke, etc. Expense Report Date Description 10/26/94 Bob Clarke's Office 01/19/95 Bob Clarke's Office 03/01/95 Solicitor's Office 01/30/96 Bob Clarke's Office 02/16/96 Bob Clarke's Office Gun Club Solicitor's Invoice Mtg. Time/ Travel Total Description Hours Time /Hours Time Attend Commwlth. Crt. Hearing - Montour Trail N/A N/A Attend @ Mtg - Gun Club Review of File and Litigation Total .5 Unknown Unknown 1.5 2.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.5 1_0 1� 5.0 7.5 23. Runtas was paid $71.37 as roadmaster for attending meetings with the solicitor. 1994/1995 3.5 hours (mtg, travel) @ $9.25 /hour = $32.37 1996 4.0 hours (mtg, travel) @ $9.75 /hour = $39,00 Total $71.37 a. These meetings were not related to Runtas' duties as roadmaster. 24. On March 25, 1996, Runtas attended a meeting with the Aloe Coal Company for purposes of a site review regarding an application for a mining permit submitted to the Township by the company. a. Supervisor Lucchino also attended. b. The meeting lasted approximately one (1) hour. c. Runtas was paid his hourly wage of $9.75 per hour for attending this meeting. d. This meeting was not in relation to Runtas' duties as Roadmaster. 25. Bills are approved for payment at the Township Supervisors' monthly meetings. a. The motion at all meetings is to pay all current bills. b. Current bills include any bills paid from the date of the meeting to the date of the next meeting. 26. Between January, 1996, and March 11, 1996, Gerald Runtas attended all township meetings. 27. Runtas cast the deciding vote to pay bills at five of the township supervisor's meetings, between January, 1994, and May, 1996, which included the following dates: 01/03/95 12/13/95 03/11/95 04/08/96 05/13/96 Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 8 28. Runtas was compensated for duties not related to his position of Township Roadmaster as follows: a. Meetings b. Local Co- Operative c. Meetings w /Solicitor d. Aloe Coal Meeting Total III. DISCUSSION: $140.25 (See Finding No. 13) _ $ 76.01 (See Finding No. 20) $ 71.37 (See Finding No. 23) _ $ 9.57 (See Finding No. 24) $297.38 29. Member municipalities of the local co -op are reimbursed for wages of employees when attending co -op meetings. a. Robinson Township was reimbursed $76.01 for Runtas' wages for attending meetings. (See Finding No. 20). 30. Runtas received a private pecuniary gain of $221.37 as a result of being compensated attending meetings not related to his position as Roadmaster. a. Total Compensation: $297.38 Less Reimbursements to Township: $ 76.01 TOTAL $221.37 At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Gerald Runtas, hereinafter Runtas, 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 allegation is that Runtas violated Section 3(a) when he used the authority of his position for a private pecuniary benefit by submitting hours for compensation as Township Roadmaster which were not related to this position and when he participated in approving payments to himself. Pursuant to Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law quoted above, a public official /public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. The term "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 9 of 1989 as quoted above. Having noted the issues and applicable law, we shall now summarize the relevant facts. Runtas has been a Supervisor in Robinson Township, Washington County, since 1974 and has been employed as a full -time Township Roadmaster since 1986. During the January 3, 1994 . reorganizational meeting, Runtas was approved to work 40 hours per week. At the January reorganizational meetings in 1995 and 1996, Runtas was also appointed as Township employee even though there was no distinction between Runtas' position as Roadmaster and Township employee. Runtas' Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 9 compensation as a Roadmaster was approved by the Township Auditors at $9.25 per hour but was raised to $9.75 per hour in January, 1996. Although Runtas' duties as Roadmaster included supervising the Township road crew which consisted of two full -time employees, his duties did not include attending meetings with the County Commissioners, the Local Sanitation Co -Op or the Township Solicitor. Nevertheless, Runtas was compensated as Roadmaster for attending such meetings and performing duties unrelated to his position as Roadmaster. Fact Finding 11. Runtas received $140.25 total for the years 1994 through 1996 for attending County meetings. Fact Findings 12, 13. Robinson Township is one of 26 municipalities which are members of the Local Cooperative Sanitation Council (Council). The Robinson Township Supervisors annually appoint a delegate and alternate to the Council. In 1996, Runtas was appointed as alternate to the Council. Runtas attended Council meetings in 1994 and 1995 even though he was neither a delegate nor alternate. Runtas was compensated as a Roadmaster in the amount of $76.01 for attending meetings of the Council until March 8, 1996 when Runtas began using compensatory time or reduced his daily hours for attending such meetings. Fact. Findings 19, 20. Runtas was also paid as Roadmaster for conferring with the Township Solicitor, attending court hearings, or participating in hearing preparation with the Solicitor. Runtas was paid $71.37 for such meetings with the Solicitor which were not related to his duties as Roadmaster. Fact Findings 22, 23. In March, 1996, Runtas attended a meeting with representatives of the Aloe Coal Company for purposes of a site review relative to a mining permit application. Runtas was paid $9.75 for attending the meeting which did not relate to his duties as Roadmaster. Fact Finding 24. Runtas as a Supervisor attended Township meetings and voted to approve payments of all current bills as delineated in Fact Findings 26 and 27. Runtas received total compensation in the amount of $297.38 for duties not related to his position as Roadmaster in attending such meetings with County officials, the Solicitor, Council, and representatives of the Aloe Coal Company. Fact Finding 28. Since Runtas reimbursed $76.01 to the Township, the total private pecuniary benefit he retained amounted to $221.37. Fact Finding 30. Having summarized the above relevant facts, we must now determine whether the actions of Runtas 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 /public employee 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. In analyzing this case, we are guided by our decision in Wasiela, Order No. 932, reversed on other grounds in RH & TW v. SEC, 677 A.2d 1004 (1996). In Wasiela, supra, we found that a Township Supervisor violated Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law, inter alia, when he received compensation as a Township employee for performing administrative duties which were encompassed within the position of elected Township Supervisor. Commonwealth Court, in affirming our decision on that particular issue, noted: Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 10 The SEC determined that T.W. violated Section 3(a) of the 1978 Act by receiving hourly compensation as a laborer for performing administrative functions in 1988 and 1989 that fell within his duties as an elected Supervisor. T.W. maintains that he is entitled to hourly wages for performing these duties. RH & TW v. SEC at 16 -17. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: We sympathize with T.W.; however, there is no question that the duties at issue were supervisory in nature. The supervisory salary was statutorily set and encompassed all of the ensuing administrative functions. Thus, T.W. violated the 1978 Act when, in addition to his Supervisor's compensation, he received hourly wages as an employee for performing administrative duties. Just as in Wasiela, the actions of Runtas implicated Section 3(a) of the Ethics Law. There were uses of authority of office on the part of Runtas when he submitted hours for compensation as to his attendance at these various County meetings, Solicitor meetings, Local Co -Op meetings, and Aloe Coal Company meeting which did not relate to his position as Roadmaster. Such actions by Runtas constituted uses of authority of office. Juliante, Order No. 809. There was a pecuniary benefit consisting of the $221.37 which Runtas retained as wages for attending those meetings. The pecuniary benefit was private because it was not . authorized in law. See, 53 P.S. §65515. Lastly, the private pecuniary benefit enured to Runtas himself. Accordingly, a technical violation of Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 occurred when Runtas submitted hours for compensation for performing administrative duties which were not related to his position as Roadmaster. Perino, Order No. 980. Turning to the matter of restitution, Section 7(13) of Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. §407(13), specifically empowers this Commission to impose restitution in those instances where a public official /public employee has obtained a financial gain in violation of the Ethics Law. In this case, since it has been determined that a financial gain was obtained in transgression of the Ethics Law, restitution is warranted. Therefore, Runtas is directed to pay restitution in the amount of $221.37 in a timely manner through this Commission to Robinson Township. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by the Commission. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. Lastly, we note that the parties have filed a Stipulation of Findings and Consent Agreement which sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations. We believe that the Consent Agreement is the proper disposition for this case based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis and the totality of the facts and circumstances. 1. Gerald Runtas (Runtas), as a Supervisor for Robinson Township, is a public official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989. Runtas, 96- 057 -C2 Page 11 2. Runtas technically violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he submitted hours and received compensation for his attendance at various County meetings, Solicitor meetings, Local Co -op Council meetings, and an Aloe Coal Company meeting which did not relate to his position as Roadmaster. In Re: Gerald Runtas ORDER NO. 1071 File Docket: 96- 057 -C2 Date Decided: 1/14/98 Date Mailed: 1/26/98 1. Gerald Runtas (Runtas), as a Supervisor for Robinson Township, technically violated Section 3(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he submitted hours and received compensation for his attendance at various County meetings, Solicitor meetings, Local Co -op Council meetings, and an Aloe Coal Company meeting which did not relate to his position as Roadmaster. 2. As per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Runtas is directed to make restitution in the amount of $221.37 in a timely manner through this Commission to Robinson Township. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by the Commission. Non- compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, aO ) DANEEN E. REESE, CHAIR