HomeMy WebLinkAbout347 BiddleMr. Harry J. Biddle
R.D. #1
Bedford, PA 15522
RE: #83 -80 -C
Dear Mr. Biddle:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
November 28, 1984
Order No. 347
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:
I. Allegation: That as a Township Supervisor you participated in
establishing a Pension -life Insurance Plan(s) and policies, paid for by
Township funds, which were uniquely designed to benefit your personal
interests and from which you, as one of the trustees and /or beneficiaries,
realized cash value thereby violating the provisions of the Ethics Act,
especially Section 3(a), 65 P.S. 403(a).
A. Findings:
1. You served as a Supervisor in Bedford Township, a Township of the second
class, hereinafter, the Township, from January, 1953 until December 31, 1983.
As an elected public official you were subject to the provisions of the Ethics
Act.
2. From January, 1953 through December 31, 1983, you were employed full -time
by the Township as Roadmaster, in accordance with the provisions of the Second
Class Township Code, 53 P.S. 65511 and 65515.
a. Minutes of reorganization meetings for that period confirm that the
Board of Supervisors annually reappointed you to the position of Roadmaster.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 2
b. In accordance with the provisions of the Second Class Township Code,
hereinafter, the Code 53 P.S. 65515, your compensation, when acting as a
Roadmaster, was to be fixed by the Township auditors.
c. "Compensation" is a term that includes or encompasses more than mere
wages and includes retirement benefits which are characterized by the courts
as "deferred compensation." See McCutcheon v. SEC, 466 A.2d 283, 286 (1983).
d. As a Roadmaster you were paid and received the following, for the
period 1979 - 1983, as gross wages:
1979 - $12,823.09 1982 - $11,547.25
1980 - $13,624.79 1983 - $15,808.52
1981 - $15,361.01
3. The minutes or reports of the meeting of the auditors of the Township,
available for our review, from 1975 to 1983, indicate the following with
respect to the setting of the compensation for Supervisors:
a. (1) Meeting Date: January 7, 1975.
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
- $4.25 per hour - January 1, 1975 through June 30, 1975 - Road -
master /Heavy Equipment Operator.
- $4.35 per hour - July 1, 1975 through December 31, 1975.
- $4.00 per hour - January 1, 1975 through June 30, 1975 - Road
Supervisor /Operating other Equipment.
- $4.10 per hour - July 1, 1975 through December 31, 1975.
- $40.00 per week - January 1, 1975 through December 31, 1975 -
Expense Account in lieu of salary for Lawrence Hixon,
Supervisor.
(3) Benefits, other than wages fixed as follows:
Paid Vacation for Bedford Township Supervisors was set and
approved as follows: 2 weeks per year - 1 through 12 years
service; 3 weeks per year - 12 years or more service.
Retirement Plan: Attorney Lins explained that Bedford Township
pays a percentage of each Supervisor's salary into a fund
approved by the Federal Government that is held in escrow as
tax -free income until each supervisor elects to withdraw it
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 3
either in a lump sum or in monthly payments. It was moved by
Jim Thomas and seconded by Berneice Lindemood that Bedford
Township continue participation in the existing retirement
plan. Motion carried.
b. (1) Meeting date: January 6, 1976.
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
Roadmaster /Heavy
1976 by $.25 per
Road Supervisor's
per hour.
Equipment Operator - increased for fiscal
hour to $4.60 per hour.
hourly rate increased $.25 per hour to $4.35
Expense account for Lawrence Nixon, Supervisor, raised $5.00
per week to total of $45.00 per week.
(3) Benefits, other than wages, fixed as follows:
Paid Vacation for Bedford Township Supervisors was set and
approved as follows: 2 weeks per year 1 through 12 years
service; 3 weeks per year 12 years or more service.
Retirement Plan: It was moved by Jim Thomas and seconded by
Don Kane that Bedford Township continue participation in the
existing retirement plan. Motion carried.
c. (1) Meeting date: January 4, 1977
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
Heavy Equipment Operator - $4.85 hour.
Working Supervisor - $4.60 per hour.
(3) Benefits, other than wages, fixed as follows:
Primary election day approved as a paid holiday for working
Supervisor(s).
Six days sick leave per year to a working Supervisor.
That "any items not specifically covered from the 1976 minutes
will remain unchanged."
d. (1) Meeting date: January 3, 1978
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 4
g.
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
- Heavy Equipment Operator - $5.20 per hour.
- Working supervisor - $4.94 per hour.
Expense account, non - working Supervisor.
Expense account for Lawrence Nixon, Supervisor, no more than
$45.00 per week.
Benefits, other than wages, fixed as follows:
(3)
▪ Vacation and holidays, same as 1977.
- Approved continuation of "existing retirement plan."
e. (1) Meeting date: February 7, 1978, special meeting.
(2) Wages /salaries - no charge except that non - working Supervisor
Hixon's expense account authorization was discontinued.
f. (1) Meeting date: January 3, 1979
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
- Heavy Equipment Operator - $5.55 per hour.
Working Supervisor - $5.30 per hour.
(3) Benefits, other than wages fixed as follows:
Vacation, same as 1978.
Approved continuation of "existing retirement plan."
(1) Meeting date: January 8, 1980
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
Heavy Equipment Operator - $6.00 per hour.
Working Supervisor - $5.75 per hour.
Benefits, other than wages, fixed or discussed as follows:
Vacation - 1 year service - 5 work days; 2 years service - 10
work days; 7 years service - 15 work days.
(3)
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 5
Paid holidays same as 1979 with addition of Good Friday.
Sick leave set at six days per year.
Deferred approval of hospitalization plan for Supervisors until
auditors get report from supervisors on cost of proposed plan.
No mention of retirement plan.
h. (1) Meeting date: uncertain.
(2) Wages /salaries - not reviewed.
(3) Benefits other than wages, discussed and documented in a letter
sent by auditors to Township supervisors as of May 6, 1980.
The letter states, in effect, that the auditors were aware of a
pension plan adopted in June, 1979 to include Supervisors
Biddle and Weaver at a cost of $4,400 per year. The auditors
state that this program is a form of compensation, subject to
approval of auditors. Auditors specifically disapprove this
plan, order the Supervisors to dissolve same and return the
$4,400 to the General Fund of the Township. Further, the
auditors mandate Solicitor Lins be removed from pension program
provided by Township through Connecticut General and that all
contributions and interest paid into such plan on his account
be redeemed and returned to the General Fund.
i. (1) Meeting date: January, 1981
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows - not mentioned.
(3) Benefits, other than wages fixed or discussed as follows:
Vacation - same as 1980.
Sick leave set at 10 days per year.
Motion approved as follows:
.. that any salary increase be delayed until the pension
program problems are resolved and at that time if increases are
granted, consider the possibility of making them retro- active
as of January 1, 1981.' This decision was communicated to the
supervisors in the report of April 1, 1981.
j. (1) Meeting date: Janaury 5, 1982
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 6
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
Heavy Equipment Operator - $7.00 per hour.
Working supervisors - $6.75 per hour.
(3) Benefits, other than wages, fixed as follows:
Moved and approved that all benefits remain the same as last
year.
k. (1) Meeting date: January 4, 1983
(2) Wages /salaries fixed as follows:
Roadmaster would get a $.75 per hour raise.
Assistant roadmaster would get a $.50 per hour raise.
Non - working supervisor would get a $.25 per hour raise.
(3) Benefits, other than wages, fixed as follows:
"Benefits stay same as last year."
4. As early as 1969 the Township Supervisors had discussed the possibility
of establishing a pension plan for the supervisors and Township employes.
a. At a special meeting of the Bedford Township Supervisors held on
December 15, 1969, a resolution was passed, effective that date, authorizing
installation of a pension plan and the signing of any and all documents in
connection therewith and that the necessary amounts be paid to the Trustees
and the Connecticut General Life Insurance Company. You signed that
resolution.
b. At that same meeting, the supervisors established a Pension Plan
Trust Agreement. You also signed that agreement.
5. Additional minutes of the Bedford Township Supervisors' meetings confirm
the following:
a. June 2, 1970: Robert Hill, representing Connecticut General Insurance
Company, presented pension proposal for supervisors and employees. Motion by
Biddle, second by Defibaugh to accept Hill's proposal. Motion passed by a 2
to 1 vote. Supervisor Roy Shaffer voting no and you voted to approve this
proposal.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 7
b. August 4, 1970: The Supervisors agree to a life insurance and pension
plan from Connecticut General for a one -year period retro- active to January 1,
1970. The supervisors also approved and adopted a trust agreement with
Richard Lins and C. Harold Defibaugh named Trustees.
c. February 5, 1974: Motion Shaffer, second Lawrence Hixon to appoint
Harry Biddle Trustee of the Pension Plan replacing C. Harold Defibaugh whose
term of office expired on December 31, 1983. Motion passed.
d. June 25, 1979: Special meeting regarding pension plan. Supervisors
report that upon examination of the pension plan, it is recommended that an
annual contribution of $1,000 per participant be made to pension fund, plus a
percentage of the covered employees' wages. Motion to approve made by Preston
Weaver, seconded by Nixon. Motion passed unanimously, you voted.
e. March 4, 1980: Agents from Travelers and Metropolitan Insurance
companies presented proposals. Joe Lurie, Metropolitan agent, notes his
proposal is an approved IRS plan with no life insurance policies and that each
participant should be employed 1,000 hours annually to be eligible.
f. March 25, 1980: Controversy arose over legality of the present
pension -life insurance retirement plans. Assets of current plan listed as
$11,500 with a second plan including only Harry Biddle and Preston Weaver
having an initial contribution in 1979 of $4,400 from the Township general
funds. Joe Lurie suggests the present plans are discriminatory. After heated
discussion, the issue was tabled. You chaired that meeting.
g. May 6, 1980: Supervisor Howard Reppert reads a letter addressed to
the Township Supervisors' from the Township auditors asking that an
expenditure of $4,400 be reimbursed to the Township because the auditors
specifically disapproved these payments as part of the compensation for
supervisors (see No. 3, h, above). You chaired this supervisors' meeting.
h. (1) July 1, 1980: Auditors were present and inquired about their
surcharge letter (see No. 3, above) to the supervisors.
Secretary Thomas Ickes reported that he wrote to the Columbia
Life Insurance Company asking for a full refund but he has had
no reply. Auditor Kane noted that the letter by the auditors
was also a notice of a legal surcharge to the supervisors if
the money is not returned.
(2) Motion Biddle, second Weaver that the supervisors adopt an
additional pension plan for working supervisors. Resolution
passed to join the Municipal Employee's Retirement System under
Article 4 -1/80, with the Township picking up all years for past
service. Resolution passed by a 2 to 1 vote. You and Weaver
voted in favor, Reppert opposing.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 8
November 28, 1984
i. November 5, 1980: Following discussion on the Municipal Employees
Retirement System for working supervisors, it was agreed to have an amendment
prepared to inlcude 10 years prior service and a 50 -50 employee - employer
contribution for a total of 7.0%. You chaired that meeting and approved the
amendment.
(1) April 1, 1981: Auditor's Report. The Township auditors
hand - delivered a letter to the Board of Supervisors which
stated, "they will not approve participation by the supervisors
in any existing or future proposed pension plan from this date
forward." Further, any expenditure of Township funds to any
existing pension plan would be subject to surcharge.
(2) At suggestion of Township Secretary /Treasurer Thomas Ickes,
Motion by Weaver, second by Billotte to inform the State
Municipal Pension Board that the Township hereby dissolves
itself of any participation in their pension program. Passed
to 2 to 0 vote with Reppert abstaining.
(3) Secretary Treasurer Ickes instructed to notify Connecticut
General that past due premium in an amount of $1,107 would not
be renewed in view of the Auditor's ruling and that no stock
held should be transferred to cover such premiums.
k. Sometime after the Supervisors received this April 1, 1981
letter /report from the auditors, you and Supervisor Weaver sent a letter to
the auditors stating:
(1) That you and Weaver had completed reimbursing the Township for
expenses associated with the purchase of insurance from Columbia
Insurance Company (see No. 5, f, above);
(2) That if the auditors would approve "bringing current" the
Connecticut General Fund for yourself and Supervisor Weaver, the
supervisors would approve resolutions to terminate all other
pesnsions that would benefit them in any way;
(3) That the working supervisors wanted a 13% cost of living adjustment
retro- active to January 1st as to their per hour wage and payment
of 11 cents per hour into a medical benefit plan similar to that
approved for other working employees.
(4) That if the auditors did not approve of these requests
"consideration will be given to the submission of a resignation by
Road Foreman, Harry Biddle, ... and it will be necessary to hire a
qualified and capable foreman ... for remainder of the year."
j•
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 9
6. Records of the Connecticut General Life Insurance Company confirm that
the Township supervisors purchased a pension plan, hereinafter, the Plan, that
included whole life insurance policies, hereinafter referred to as the
life - policies, and a side mutual fund, hereinafter, the Fund.
a. The Plan became effective December 15, 1969 with C. Harold Defibaugh
and Richard Lins listed as trustees.
b. Account number of the Fund was 520007667.
c. Contributions to the Fund by Bedford Township were made as follows:
(1) 7/2/70 - $5,202.49
(2) 5/27/71 - $5,202.49
(3) 3/29/72 - $2,500.00
(4) 7/26/72 - $2,702.49
(5) 5/16/73 - $3,168.00
(6) 2/3/75 - $5,847.05
(7) 1/13/76 - $1,769.76
(8) 6/4/79 - $2,500.00
(9) No contributions were made after June 4, 1979.
d. Captial gain re- investments were made to the Fund as follows:
(1) 2/10/81 - $2,917.11
(2) 2/22/82 - $205.41 - short term.
(3) 2/23/82 - $1,162.44 - long term.
(4) 2/22/83 - $303.98 - short term.
(5) 2/22/83 - $1,044.93 - long term.
e. 1977 - Account Number changes to 520036407 after Harry Biddle
replaces C. Harold Defibaugh as Trustee.
f. Fund shares were redeemed as follows:
(1) 8/23/74 - $6,483.86 (964.860 shares) for former Supevisor
C. Harold Defibaugh.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 10
November 28, 1984
(2) 10/1/74 - $5,847.05 (964.860 shares) for former Supervisor
Roy Shaffer.
(3) 2/24/83 - $28,314.58 (2,029.719 shares) - See Finding No. 9 for
the breakdown of recipients of this sum.
g. You are listed as insured under life insurance policy No. 1354292
issued in 1969 at an annual premium of $484.96 and policy No. 1522764 issued
in 1973 at an annual premium of $65.57.
h. Premiums for this life - policy were paid to Connecticut General by
Bedford Township as follows:
Premium Due Date Amount Date Received C. G.
(1) 12/15/69 $2,448.69 10/19/70
(2) 12/15/70 2,448.69 2/26/71
(3) 12/15/71 2,448.69 1/11/72
(4) 12/15/72 2,448.69 12/11/72
(5) 12/15/73 1,424.63 1/25/74
(6) 12/15/74 1,107.70 12/16/74
(7) 12/15/76 1,107.70 1/5/76
(8) 12/15/77 1,107.70 12/7/76
(9) 12/15/78 1,107.70 12/1/78
(10) 12/15/79 1,107.70 1/3/80
(11) 12/15/80 1,107.70 3/10/81
7. You terminated your participation in the Plan and by letter dated March
8, 1983, from Connecticut General to the Township you received a check No.
55198128 in the amount of $185.60 and a check No. 55198127 in the amount of
$2,107.12.
a. These checks were made payable to you.
b. These checks represented the cash surrender value for life- insurance
policies Nos. 1354292 and 1522764.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 11
c. These policies were whole life policies on which you were the owner,
but for which the Township paid the premiums as described in No. 6
above.
d. There is no evidence that the amounts of these checks were deposited
or returned to the Township's benefit.
e. You admit you received these checks and cashed same or otherwise
converted or reduced these checks to your own account and /or use.
8. In addition to the cash surrender value of the life insurance policies
listed in No. 7 above, you withdrew from the Fund in late 1983 and a check for
the amount and payments due on your account was sent to Solicitor Lins, in his
and your names in February, 1983.
9. Former Township Solicitor Richard Lins provided a breakdown of the
amounts each participant received from the redemption of Fund shares on
February 24, 1983.
a. Supervisor Harry Biddle -
b. Supervisor Preston Weaver -
c. Sec. /Treas. Thomas Ickes -
d. Solicitor Richard Lins -
$12,500.00
8,500.00
3,657.29
3,657.29
Total $28,314.58
November 28, 1984
10. Lins also provided a breakdown each participant received from the cash
surrender value of life insurance policies in 1983.
a. Harry Biddle - $2,292.72 (See No. 7, above)
b. Preston Weaver - 1,641.18
c. Richard Lins - 341.03
d. Thomas Ickes - 299.39
11. You admitted to receiving the aformentioned amounts and that the money you
received was applied to the purchase of a farm tractor. You stated you would
not repay any of pension /insurance monies received.
12. No other Township employees participated in the (mutual) Fund portion of
the Plan available to the supervisors, as described above, although former
Township employees Harry Layton and Alvie Claycomb received whole life
insurance protection through Connecticut General.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 12
13. As a result of the auditors letter of May 6, 1980 (see No. 3, above), the
following occurred with respect to the auditors' disapproval of the Township's
purchase of additional pension coverage for you and Supervisor Weaver at an
annual cost of $4,400 with Columbia Insurance Company.
a. You and Supervisor Weaver sent the letter described in No. 5, k,
above.
b. You and Supervisor Weaver repaid the Township $237.06 each; which
represented the penalty for early termination of this policy imposed
upon the Township.
c. Neither you nor Supervisor Weaver received any benefit or gain from
this policy.
B. Discussion: It is clear that as a public official you must observe the
requirements of Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act as set forth below:
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).
The courts have clearly held that a pension is "deferred compensation"
and that the affirmative approval of this type of compensation or benefit by
the auditors is mandatory. See McCutcheon, supra. Without such auditor
approval, receipt of pension benefits in McCutcheon, consisting of the cash
value of life insurance policies was deemed compensation not provided by law
and the State Ethics Commission ruling requiring repayment of sums so secured
was upheld. Following the McCutcheon ruling this Commission issued a policy
statement to be used as guidance in reviewing and judging similar cases. We
can and should apply this policy statement, found in 51 Pa. Code, Chapter 7 to
this situation.
Our policy statement directed us to consider a number of factors in
determining if a violation of Act 170 exists. For ease of reference and
analysis, these factors and the factual context of this case are listed
below:
POLICY STATEMENT 51 PA CODE 7.13 FACTS /CIRCUMSTANCES PRESENT IN THIS
PROCEEDING
(1) Whether the auditors of the The auditors in 1975 approved and
township have affirmatively apprcved continued to do so until 1981 (Findings
the inclusion of the supervisor in No. 2, a through i)
such a plan or any change in a plan.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle November 28, 1984
Page 13
(2) Whether there are recorded offi-
cial minutes of the auditors eviden-
cing their action as described in
paragraph (1).
(3) Whether the approval of the
auditors pre -dated the supervisor's
action with respect to the plan or
the Court decision in McCutcheon or
came afterward.
(4) Whether such approval relates to
plans in existence and apply to the
supervisor prior to the date of the
auditor's approval or operates pros-
pectively only.
(5) Whether the auditors have consi-
dered the question and recorded their
conclusions as to whether such plans
as they approved are similar to other
plans in effect for employes in the
locality for similar services as are
performed by the supervisor.
(6) Whether the supervisor to be
included and to benefit from the plan
took action in his official capacity
as supervisor or otherwise with
respect to the plan and whether that
action resulted in the immediate
inclusion of the supervision in the
plan without his re- election inter-
vening between his action on the plan
and his inclusion therein.
(7) Whether there are employees /offi-
cials other than the supervisor
within the Township and whether :
The minutes of the auditors reflect
approval of a pension program but do
not show the auditors realized the
specific provisions of the program, the
cost or extent of same.
The auditor's approval in 1975 came
after the supervisors set up the Trust
program in 1969 and continued until
1981.
The approval related to the plan /trust
set up by the supervisors in 1969 and
makes no mention of retro- active
approval or "grandfathering."
There is no recordation in the
auditor's minutes of any such analysis.
It is clear that the supervisors,
including you, took action to esta-
blish, to continue, and to authorize
Township payments for the Connecticut
General Fund and side policies secured
to fulfill the terms of the Trust set
up in 1969.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 14
(i) The plan is one which includes
the employees /officials other than
the supervisor.
(ii) The plan provided for the
supervisor is substantially different
from that in which employees /offi-
cials in the Township other than the
Supervisor are included.
(iii) the plan is a group or indivi-
dual plan or a combination of both.
(8) Whether the plan operates to the
benefit of the supervisors with
respect to inclusion or any of the
following:
(i) Immediate vesting;
(ii) Cash value;
(iii) Conversion privileges;
(iv) Insurability status; or
(v) Premium dividends or distri-
butions.
(9) Whether the plan under which the
Supervisor is included provides
benefits which bear a reasonable and
realistic relationship to the amount
paid to the supervisor in other forms
of compensation and to the services
provided to the township by the
Supervisor recognizing the amount,
duration, nature and other terms of
and benefits derived from the plan.
November 28, 1984
(i) The only other official included in
our understanding was Solicitor Lins;
no other Towmship employees were in
this Trust, Connecticut General Fund,
and side policy program.
(ii) Other Township employees, Layton
and Claycomb did not have same
coverage. See Finding No. 12.
(iii) Individuals within this plan,
such as yourself, could secure a cash
value or return. The policies were
not group ones.
The plan apparently provided for a
period before vesting, but allowed a
cash return after a certain point.
The Trust agreement was keyed to a
return based upon years of service and
compensation during such years of
service.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 15
(10) Whether the supervisor or
auditors took action with respect to
the plan and their inlcusion therein
after seeking advice of and in
reliance upon the advice of others
and:
(1) The nature of the advice -
written or oral and outcome or
direction given.
(ii) The relationship of the advisor
to the township or to the Supervisor
or auditors.
(iii) The benefit or detriment to the
advisor in rendering the advice.
(iv) The relationship in time between
the advice and action .on the plan.
(v) The reasonableness of the
reliance upon the advice.
November 28, 1984
The records available to us do not set
forth the nature of any advice the
supervisors received as to the Trust
set up in 1969. However, we do note
this agreement bears the notation of
"Richard W. Lins, Attorney at Law,
Bedford, Pa." who was solicitor for
the Township who was included in and
benefitted from this program. See
Findings No. 9 and 10.
It should be noted that the auditor's approval of a pension plan from
1975 -1981 was made after a cursory review of the program the supervisors had
initiated without auditor approval in 1969. It is clear that in 1981 you were
advised that the supervisors were not to continue to receive pension coverage.
See Finding No. 3(i) above.
It could be argued that the auditors, in 1981, were powerless to
disapprove or to negate this program under which you had expected to collect a
pension and which had been generally approved by the auditors from 1975 -198h
However, the auditors in 1981 had the same duty as the auditors in 1975 -1981,
i.e., to set the "compensations for the current year" authorized in the
Township Code, 53 P.S. 65515, for supervisors acting as roadmasters,
superintendents, etc. See 53 P.S. 65545. The auditors, in 1981, had the duty
to review and continue or to refuse to continue the payments of the Township
into a pension or life insurance program for you. The approval of the
auditors, up to 1981, of these payments is insufficient to justify Township
payments beyond 1981 when the auditors refused to approve these benefits as
part of your compensation. Thus, payments, if any, made on your behalf into
this pension fund or program by the Township after the auditors refusal to
approve same in 1981 and your receipt of additional cash value or benefit
derived from same would not be part of "compensation" allowed to you by law.
Mr. Harry J. Biddle
Page 16
However, the Township, because of the auditor's disapproval as of 1981,
did not continue to pay into this plan on your behalf. The Township paid no
premiums and made no contributions to the Fund during this period 1981 -1983.
You did not receive any incremental value under this plan from 1981 -1983
because of any Township payments after 1981. Any money you received as a
result of your remaining in this plan from 1981 -1983 resulted from accrual of
interest, shares, etc., and not as a result of any expenditure of Township
monies or contributions. The premiums and interest attributable to this
period, 1981 -1983, are not objectionable per se. You are entitled to retain
this amount and the amount paid to you from this Fund, in general, under these
circumstances. Accordingly, we make the following conclusion and enter this
Order as set forth below.
C. Conclusion: You did not violate Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act by using
your public office to secure financial gain other than provided by law by
seeking, approving, and securing the benefits, paid for at Township expense,
from this pension fund /program. You were entitled to these funds. until 1981,
and since no portion of the mount you received represents gain resulting from
the use of public monies to increase the value of these policies, we will take
no further action in this matter.
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 more than $1,000 or imprisoned
for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e).
SSC /na
By the .mmission,
Herb- B. Conner
Ch.1rman
November 28, 1984