HomeMy WebLinkAbout523 KauffmanMr. Ray C. Kauffman
R.D. 01
Reinholds, PA 17569
Re: 85 -071 -C
Dear Mr. Kauffman:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
Order No. 523
DECIDEDAUG 2 0 1986
MAI LEI:40=Z
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 you, a Supervisor . for West Cocalico Township, violated
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act which prohibits a public employee's or public
official's use of office or confidential information gained through that
office to obtain financial gain when you accepted compensation from the
township from January of 1979 to date, without auditor approval for said
compensation.
A. Findings:
1. You have served as a Supervisor of West Cocalico Township from 1968 until
the present time and as township roadmaster from 1972 until the present time.
2. You are a public official subject to the requirements of the State Ethics
Act.
3. From 1979 through 1985, you received $25 for attending meetings of the
township board of supervisors. !luring 1986, you received $50 for each meeting
attended.
4. Auditors' minutes for 1983 through 1986 record the following:
a. January 4, 1983: $10.00 per hour for the roadmaster and $9.25 per
hour for supervisors performing township work.
h. January 5, 1984: $10.25 per hour for roadmaster and $9.25 per hour
for supervisors performing township work.
c. January 9, 1985: $10.50 per hour for roadmaster and $9.25 per hour
for supervisors performing township work.
Mr. Ray C. Kauffman
Page 2
5. You attended meetings for which you received compensation on the same days
for which you also icreived roadmaster compensation as follows:
DATE
d. January 7, 1986: $10.50 per hour for the roadmaster and $9.25 per
hour for supervisors performing township work.
T Ir"F
1979
1982
1983
HOURS WORKED
AS ROADMASTER
9/6 .i. A M 8
10/5 9:00 A.i' :0 8
10/12 9:00 A.M. 8
12/4 8:30 A.M. 8
1981
r
4/8 9:00 A.M. 8
6/23 8:30 A.M, 8
12/17 9:00 A.M. 10
3/24 8:30 A.M. 8
4/7 8:30 A.M. 14
9/21 9:15 A.M. 8
11 /1C 9:00 A.M. 8
12/15 9:00 A.M. 8
1/29 9:OC A.M. 0
4/19 9:00 A.M. 8
5/3 9:00 A.M. 8
6/6 11:00 A.M. 8
7/13 8:30 A.M. 8
9/7 9:30 A.M. 8
10 /10 10:00 A.M. 8
11/9 8:30 A.M. 8
12/20 9:00 A.M. 8
Mr. Ray C. Kauffman
Page 3
1984
HOURS WORKED
TIME AS ROADMASTER
2/15 9 :00 A.M. 8
2/22 9:00 A.M. 8
2/29 9:00 A.M. 8
4/3 9:00 A.M. 8
4/18 9:00 A.M. .8
12/19 9:00 A.M. 8
1985
10/14 9:30 A.M. 8
11/12 9:02 A.M. 5
12/23 9:02 A.M. 6
12/31 9 :37 A.M. 8
1986
1/13 9:20 A.M. 9
1/20 9:30 A.M. 6
2/17 9:35 A.M. 6
3/17 9:34 A.M. 6
4/21 9:30 A.M. 6
6. You state that you did not include the meeting time in your hours as
roadmaster.
7. The township secretary- treasurer confirms your statement and also
said the hours worked as a roadmaster on a meeting day are maintained on a
separate payroll sheet.
B. Discussion: As a township supervisor in a township of the second class,
you are clearly a public official as that term is defined in the State Ethics
Act. 65 P.S. §402. As such, your conduct is subject to the requirements of
that law. Sowers, 80 -050, Weltz, 86 -001.
The Ethics Act provides as follows:
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).
Mr. Ray C. Kauffman
Page 4
Within the above provision of law, a public official may not use his
public position in order to obtain any financial gain, other than the
compensation that is provided for by law. This provision of law would prevent
a public official from accepting a salary o: compensation to which he clearly
is not entitled. See Domala.kes, 85010.
Iwthe instant situation, wF' must determine whether you received, through
your public position, a rinancci<1 gain other . ftan the compensation that is
provided for by law. Clearry the receipt of funds from the township is the
receipt of a financial g a i n pursuant to the above provision cf law. We must
next determine, therefore, whether the funds received, is part of the
compensation provided or by law. Generally, the Second Class Township Code
provides that supervisors may receive, from the township, a statutory salary
for their service township supervisors. 65 P.S. Section 65515. A township
supervisor may also Le appointed as roadmaster, laborer, or
secretary /treasurer and receive additional compensation therefor. That
compensation, however, r: +r,s ` be,affirmatively fixed by the township board of
auditors. In the instant si tuat on, you received a salary 'or attending
meetings of the township supervisors in addition to the salary that was
provided for you by the auditors as a working township supervisor. In
relation to the specific situation, the Second Class Township Code originally
provided as folows:
... but no supervisor shall receive compensation as a superintendent
or roadmaster for any day he receives compensation for attending 'a
meeting of supervisors, unless such meeting is held during the
nighttime. 65 P.S. §65515.
That provision of law was subsequently amended on two occasions. The
first amendment to that provision of law provided chat:
... but no supervisor shall receive compensation as a superintendent
or roadmaster for any day he receives compensation for attending a
meeting of supervisors unless such meeting is held after regular
working hours.
The most recent amendment to the above provision of law provides:
... but no supervisor shall receive compensation as a superintendent
or roadmaster for any time he spends attending a meeting of
supervisors. 65 P.S. §65515 (1985).
Under the original provision of the Township Code and the first amendment
thereto, it is arguable that fees you received for attending township meetings
on the same day on which you received your roadmaster salary could have been
in violation of the Second Class Township Code and, therefore, not part of the
compensation that was provided to you by law. This would have been so
Mr. Ray C. Kauffman
Page 5
specifically in relation to the fact that the township meetings were held
during the morning hours. The original provision of the Township Code
indicated that a supervisor could not receive his salary for attending
meetings unless such meetings were held during the "nighttime." Additionally,
the subsequent amendment to the Township Code indicated that the supervisors
could not receive such compensation unless such meeting was held after
regular working hours ". Therefore, the strictest interpretation of this
particular provision of the Township Code would indicate that the compensation
you received for attending such meetings would not have been authorized by
law. Under that theory, then, you would have received a financial gain
through your public position that was not part of the compensation provided
for by law, thus, occasioning a violation of the State Ethics Act. The most
recent amendment to the Second Class Township Code, however, indicates that a
township supervisor may not receive his compensation as roadmaster or
superintendent for any time he spends attending a meeting of the supervisors.
The actual time and date of the meeting, pursuant to this latest amendment, is
not determinative.
Our review of the Second Class Township Code, in general, leads us to
believe that the intent of the general assembly, in all three provisions
above, was to insure the public that township supervisors were not receiving a
double compensation for performing one function. The position of a township
supervisor as an employee and the position of a township supervisor as an
official, while permitted under the Second Class Township Code are clearly to
be distinct. See McCutcheon v. State Ethics Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. Ct.
529, 4668, 283, (1983); Lescalleet v. Unemployment Compensation Board of
Review, Pa. Commw. Ct. , 505 A.2d 1086, (1986). Under this rationale,
a township supervisor should clearly not receive compensation as a roadmaster
for periods during which he was acting as a public official through the
attendance of supervisors' meetings. In the instant situation, a review of
the records indicate that while you received a salary for acting as a
roadmaster on the same days during which you attended supervisors' meetings,
the supervisors' meetings were held in the morning prior to the start of the
work day. Township records indicate that separate payroll sheets were
maintained for your position as roadmaster and your position as supervisor.
Thus, a review of the evidence indicates that you did not receive compensation
as a superintendent or roadmaster any time during which you spent attending a
meeting of the supervisors. As such, we find that there was no violation of
the State Ethics Act in this situation.
C. Conclusion: You did not violate the State Ethics Act in that the
financial gain that you received as a township supervisor, for attendance at
supervisors' meetings, was compensation provided for by law. This is so in
Mr. Ray C. Kauffman
Page 6
light of the fact that while you did receive compensation as a township
roadmaster on the same days for which meeting fees were received, the meetings
were held prior to normal working hours and you, therefore, did not receive
compensation as a superintendent or roadmaster for any time spent in the
attendance of meetings of supervisors. As such, there was no violation of the
State Ethics Act.
Our files in this case will remain confidential n accordance with
Section 8(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a). However, this Order is final
rid will bps made available as a public document 15 days after, service (defined
Fs 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
rel easi ng , di scuss.ing. or ci rcul ati ng thi s Order.
Any person who violates the confidentiality of a Commission proceeding
is guilty of a wi sdemeanor 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).
By the Commission,
G. Sieber Pancoast
Chairman