Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout326 GlovaMr. Eugene J. Glova c/o Richard J. Green, Esq. 305 Franklin Street Johnstown, PA 15901 Re: No. 83 -98 -C Dear Mr. Glova: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 ORDER OF THE COMMISSION May 24, 1984 Order No. 326 The State Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a possible violation of Act 170 of 1978. The Commission has now completed its investigation. The individual allegations, conclusions, and findings on which those conclusions are based are as follows: 1. Allegation: That you, as a Supervisor in Upper Yoder Township, use the township telephone for personal calls and then approve the payment of those calls and that this is a violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(a), because you are using your office and /or confidential information acquired through that office realize personal financial gain. A. Findings: 1. You served as a Supervisor of Upper Yoder Township from 1978 to 1984 and are subject to the Ethics Act. 2. Telephone services for Upper Yoder Township are provided by the General Telephone Company. a. The Township receives separate hills for the Township Garage, the Police Department, and the Township municipal offices. Each of these bills has an itemized listing of long distance telephone calls. b. All three of these bills are routine and included as part of the bills submitted for Supervisors' approval at Township meetings. c. Supervisors do not normally examine the list of itemized calls. Eugene Glova Page 2 May 24, 1984 3. Township phone bills show the following phone calls to Mr. Joseph Costanzo, Agent, and Ronald Clark, Pension Specialist, Bankers Life Insurance Company between May 14, 1982 and April 26, 1983. a. Four calls were made to Costanzo at his office. The charges for these calls were $49.96. b. Three calls were made to Costanzo's home phone. The charges for these calls were $14.09. c. Twenty -five calls were made to Ronald Clark at his office. Charges for these calls were $50.40. d. Two calls were made to Ronald Clark at his home. Charges for these calls were $4.82. e. You state that nearly all of these calls were made by you as part of the Township's consideration of placing their pension plans with another insurance company. f. You admit that the Township paid for some of your personal calls but claim the charges for these calls were only a few dollars. 4. Early in 1982 the Township Supervisors decided to update the police and municipal workers' pension plans but there was no official action taken at this time in any meetings of the Supervisors in regard to changes. a. There is no official record of your appointment as Township representative in these pension plan changes, but at a meeting on August 17, 1982, you reported that you were still receiving proposals. b. In the spring of 1982, Mr. Ronald Clark, Assistant Regional Group and Pension Manager for Bankers Life Insurance Company, met with you to discuss the Township's desire to change its pension plans. At that time, he became aware that you wanted to become a Bankers Life agent. c. You handled all contacts with the Bankers Life Insurance Company. There is no evidence that you contacted companies other than Bankers Life. d. The Township Secretary corresponded with the companies which carried the existing insurarce plans of the Township and notified those companies when the pension funds were transferred to the Bankers Life Insurance Company. Eugene J. Glova May 24, 1984 Page 3 5. a. On September 21, 1982, you made the motion to have Joseph Costanzo made the Agent of Record for the Upper Yoder Township pension funds. b. In August, 1982, you assisted Ronald Clark in explaining the advantages of the Bankers' plan to the police officers. c. On September 30, 1982, you made another presentation on pension plans and stated that police and the municipal workers desired to change to a new carrier. d. You contacted a number of employees to persuade them to make the change to the Bankers Life plan. 6. On Octber 1, 1982, the municipal workers' pension funds were transferred to Bankers Life Insurance Company. a. Joseph Costanzo received a commission of $3,200 as a result of this transfer. b. There is no evidence that you received any commission from this transfer. 7. On January 20, 1983, you were licensed to sell insurance for Bankers Life Insurance Company. a. Joseph Costanzo sponsored your application to become an agent with Bankers Life. B. Discussion: Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act states: Section 3. Restricted Activities. (a) No public official or public employee shall use his public office or any confidential information received through his holding public office to obtain financial gain other than compensation provided by law for himself, a member of his immediate family, or a business with which he is associated. 65 P.S. 403(a). Eugene J. Glova May 24, 1984 Page 4 You received no commission from the transfer of the pension plans to Bankers Life Insurance Company. It is also clear that your general contacts with the Bankers Life Company were made with the knowledge of the other Supervisors even though there is no official record of your appointment as the Township representative in this matter. We find no violation of Section 3(a) because there is no evidence that you used your office for financial gain. However, the Commission must review Section 1 of the Act which states: Section 1. Purpose. The Legislature hereby declares that public office is a public trust and that any effort to realize personal financial gain through public office other than compensation provided by law is a violation of that trust. In order to strengthen the faith and confidence of the people of the State in their government, the Legislature further declares that the people have a right to be assured that the financial interests of holders of or candidates for public office present neither a conflict nor the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. Because public confidence in government can best be sustained by assuring the people of the impartiality and honesty of public officials, this act shall be liberally construed to promote complete disclosure. 65 P.S. 401. Your meetings and frequent phone contacts with a company with which you were seeking employment, with which you became employed after being sponsored by the agent who received commission from the transfer of Township insurance created the appearance of a conflict with the public trust. This appearance is heightened because there is no evidence that you contacted any other company on behalf of the Township in your review of the Township insurance programs and your failure to inform the public you served that you had a personal interest in becoming an Agent of Bankers Life Insurance Company. You should have made it known publicly that you were seeking employment with the insurance company and abstained from any Township decision involving this company. C. Conclusion: We find no violation of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act because there is no evidence that you used Township telephones for financial gain other than compensation allowed by law. However, we do find that you created the appearance of a conflict with the public trust because you were pursuing a personal interest in becoming an Agent for Bankers Life Insurance Company while simultaneously participating in Township business with this company. You must give public notice of the circumstances and abstain from decisions by your governmental body if you are in a similar situation in the future. Eugene J. Glova Page 5 Our files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a). However, this Order is final and will be made available as a public document 15 days after service (defined as mailing) unless you file documentation with the Commission which justifies reconsideration and /or challenges pertinent factual findings. See 51 Pa. Code 2.38. During this 15 -day period, no one, including the Respondent unless he waives his right to challenge this Order, may violate this confidentiality by releasing, discussing or circulating this Order. Any person who violates the confidentiality of a Commission proceeding is guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not morc than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e). HBC /jc May 24, 1984