HomeMy WebLinkAbout572 SandersMr. Raymond H. Sanders
7920 Cold Spring Road
Girard, PA 16417
Re: 85 -121 -C
Dear Mr. Sanders:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
Order No. 572
DECIDED: May, 26, 1987
MAILED: June 2, 1987
The 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 in Girard Township, violated Section
3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. §403(a)., which prohibits a public employee's
or public official's use of office or confidential information gained through
that office to obtain financial gain other than compensation allowed by law
when you received pay from the township without being properly appointed to a
position and having auditor approval of your wages.
A. Findings:
1. You served as a Girard Township Supervisor since 1971, and as an elected
official you are subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act.
2. Minutes of the Girard Township Supervisors' reorganization meetings
disclosed that for the years 19$0 through 1985, the board appointed a
roadmaster to supervise the road crew.
a. Records further disclose that during this period, the board of
supervisors did not authorize any supervisors to be employed as
part -time road workers.
You were not appointed roadmaster in any year from 1980 -1985.
3. Minutes of the Girard Township Auditors for the years 1980 through 1987
disclosed the following regarding compensation for township supervisors:
a. January 8, 1980: Part -time supervisor salary set at $5.75 /hour.
$350.00 annual salary set for supervisors attending
outside meetings. Payment to be a non - taxable
reimbursement for .;raveling expenses. Conventions,
schools, and supervisor meetings shall be paid by
state mandate.
Mr, Raymond H. Sanders
Page 2
b. January 6, 1981: Roadmaster salary set at $7,00 /hour; part -time
supervisor wage set at $6.25 hour.
$350.00 annual pay set for supervisors attending
outside meetings.
c. January 5, 1982: Roadmaster salary set at $13,000.00 /year.
Part -time supervisor wage set at $6.50 /hour.
$400.00 annual pay set for supervisors attending
outside meetings.
d. January 18, 1982: Auditors passed motion that the supervisor keep a
written record of all meetings attended and
location of meetings.
Full -time qualified roadmaster salary set at
$16,965.00.
e. January 14, 1983: Roadmaster pay set at $17,737.20/year.
Part -time supervisor wage set at $6.80 /hour.
Auditors recommend use of PennDot form MS907 by all
supervisors to substantiate their pay.
Outside meeting pay for supervisors set at the same
hourly rate as part -time supervisors plus
$.17 /mile. Auditors motion that the supervisors
appoint one person as the delegate and submit a
voucher listing the name, nature of the meeting and
location monthly to the township secretary/
treasurer.
Insurance benefits:
Ray Sanders: Life - •$21.45 /quarter.
Hospitalization $319.27 /quarter.
Daniel Douglass: Life - $21.45 /quarter
Hospitalization $306.56 /quarter.
Wi 1 l i am ?.orland: Life - $21.45 /quarter
Hospitalization $426.55 /quarter.
Pension - $500.00 /year.
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 3
f. January 4, 1984: Roadmaster pay set at $362.00 /week.
Outside meeting pay set at $7.20 /hour plus
$.20 /mile for use of personal vehicle.
g.
Insurance benefits:
Borland - Hospitalization - $498.14 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter
Pension - $500.00 /year.
Sanders - Hospitalization = $473.24 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter
Douglas - Hospitalization - $363.07 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter.
January 8, 1985: Roadmaster pay set at $375.00 /week.
Supervisors working part -time - $7.45 /hour.
Outside meeting pay for supervisors designated as
the township representative set at $7.45 /hour plus
$.20 /mile for use of personal vehicle.
Borland - Hospitalization - $498.14 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter
Pension - $500.00 /year
Sanders - Hospitalization,- $473.24 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter
Douglas - Hospitalization - $363.07 /quarter
Life - $21.45 /quarter
h. January 8, 1986: Roadmaster pay and benefits to remain the same as
1985.
Insurance Benefits:
No hospitalization or life insurance approved
for non - working supervisors (Douglas, Sanders) per
recommendation of Solicitor Schroeck by letter
dated September 18, 1985.
1
Supervisors to be reimbursed $.20 /mile for use of
personal vehicle while on township business.
Mr. Raymond P. Fan:crs
Page 4
i. January 6, 198;: Roadmastc; pay Ott at $39().0 /week, plus overtime
for overtime over 40 hours. Life insurance and
hospitalization to terminate when full -time
employment ceases pension plan disapproved. Pay for
supervisor working part -time approved at
$7.00 /hour.
4. Girard Township payroll records disclose that you were paid the following
amounts as a part -time supervisor /laborer:
a. 1979: 0
b. '1980: 15 hours at $5.75/hour = $74.75
c. 1981: 31 hours at $6.25 /hour = $193.75
d. 1982: 341 hours at $6.50 /hour = $2,216.50
e. 1983: 323.5 hours at $6.80 /hour = $2,199.80
f. 1984: 367 hours at $7.20 /hour = $2,642.40
g. 1985: 355.5 hours at 7.44 /hour = $2,644.92
5. Township payroll records further disclose that you were paid the following
amounts for outside meeting pay:
a. 1979: $300.00
b. 1980: $350.00
c. 1981: $350.00
d. 1982: $400.00
e. 1983: $158.95 - 6 meetings at $6.80 /hour plus $.20 mileage.
f. 198': $187.20 - 7 meetings at $7.20 /hour, plus $.20 mileage.
g. 1985: $149.00 - 8 meetings at $7.45 /hour, plus $.20 mileage.
F� Discussion: Township supervisors in townships of.the second class are
r,a'blic officials as that term is defined in the State Act. 65 F.;.
§02. As suc'i, their conduct must conform to the regbi remerrts cf the State;
Ethics Act. See, Sowers, 80 -050.
Thu State 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. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 5
Within the above provision of law, this Commission has already determined
that township superviors may not approve or accept any compensation for
themselves that is not in accordance with the compensation set forth in the
Second Class Township Code. This determination has been affirmed by the
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. See McCutcheon v. State Ethics
Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. 529, 466 A.2d 283, (1982). Compensation awarded or
received by a township supervisor that is not in accordance with the
provisions of law could constitute a violation of the above cited Section of
the State Ethics Act.
The Second Class Township Code provides that township supervisors shall
receive the following compensation:
Compensation of Supervisors -- Supervisors may
receive from the general township fund, as compensation,
an amount fixed by ordinance not in excess of the
following:
Township Population
Not more than $,9999
5,000 to 9,999
10,000 to 14,999
15,000 to 24,000
25,000 to 34,999
Such salaries shall be payable monthly or quarterly
for the duties imposed by the provisions of this act. The
population shall be determined by the latest available
official census figures. The compensation of supervisors,
when acting as superintendents, roadmasters or laborers,
shall be fixed by the township auditors either per hour,
per day, per week, semi - monthly or monthly, which
compensation for the use of a passenger car, or a two
axled four - wheeled motor truck having a chassis weight of
less than two thousand pounds when required and actually
used for the transportation of road and bridge laborers
and their hand tools and for the distribution of cinders
and patching material from a stock pile, as the auditors
shall determine and approve; 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, as amended Act 68, 1985.
(Prior to the above amendment, the above provision
provided for a set fee of $50 per meeting).
Annual Maximum Compensation
Fifteen hundred dollars
Two thousand dollars
Twenty -six hundred dollars
Thirty -three hundred dollars
Thirty -five hundred dollars
Mr. Rayr. nu I. 3aider
Page 6
In reference to the meetings for which supervisors may receive
compensation, the code, as applied for the time period in question further
provided as follows:
The township supervisors shall meet for the
transaction of business at least once each month, at a
time and place to be fixed by the board, but they shall
not be paid for more than sixteen meetings in any one
year, except in any township where, on account of the
exercise of governmental functions other than those
relating to roads, more meetings are necessary, in which
case, the number of meetings for which the supervisors may
be paid may be increased to any number, not exceeding
fifty meetings in any year which shall include hearings of
a judicial or quasi - judicial nature. Two members shall
constitute a quorum. Except as otherwise provided in this
act, an affirmative vote of a majority of the entire board
of supervisors shall be necessary in order to transact any
business. Necessary expenses incurred in such meetings,
including office rent, stationery, light and fuel, shall
be paid out of the general township fund. 53 P.S. §65512.
(The above provision was amended in 1985)
The duties that a supervisor is responsible for performing are also
regulated by statute. As can be seen from the foregoing, the compensation t,
be paid for . a supervi sor who i s. not otherwi se empl oyed by the township is
strictly regulated by the Second Class Township Code. A supervisor may only
receive compensation, as set forth above, for supervisor meetings regarding
the transaction of township business. The type of meetings for which a
township supervisor may be compensated must be one at which official township
business is transacted. Additionally, the township code provides for
compensation at the specific meetings outlined in §65512, above. The code
does not appear to permit the compensation of a townshp supervisor for
attending other types of meetings.,, or for performing the administrative
functions of his office. Any other compensation must be earned in and as part
of the services performed while serving in one of the statutory authorized
Fc > i';ions. Thus, if the township supervisors wore to award to themselves
c- pensation for attendance at meetings that are not official township
meetings of the board of supervisors, or for performing duties not authorized
by law such would violate the provisions of the State Ethics Act as such
payrn nt would not constitute compensation provided by law. We note that the
above interpretation of the Second Class Township Code is a view that has also
been expressed by the State Associ a,tion of Township Supervisors which
specifically indicated that supervisors may not be compensated for meetings
with engineers, solicitors, planning commissions, authorities, or recreation
boards. See Tuwnship News, May, 1985, Page 66„
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 7
The township code sets forth clearly when supervisors may receive
compensation other than as set forth above. Generally, township supervisors
may be employed by the township as a roadmaster, laborer, or
secretary /treasurer. 53 P.S. §65410. The compensation to be paid to
supervisors working in such positions is to be fixed by the township board of
auditors. 53 P.S. §65515; §65531; §65410. Township supervisors may not
receive any other compensation except as provided above. This concept has
been upheld by various courts in the Commonwealth. In the Commonwealth Coltar er
Warminst stert
Townshi , 8 Pa. Comm. Ct. 163, 302 A.2d 859,
of Pennsylvania held that a second class township supervisor may not appoint
himself to positions other than those set forth in the township code
(roadmaster, laborer, or secretary /treasurer), 2ndDreceei a 3d 53, compensation 1983).
therefor. See also Conrad v. Exeter Township,
It is clear, therefore, that the duties for which a township supervisor may be
compensated are strictly regulated by the township code, and must performing
in the positions set forth in the code, the supervisors' pay n
specifically set forth by the township board of auditors. Our review of this
matter indicated that the "administrative services" for which you were
compensated were not related to the roadmaster position (you were not serving
in that position) but were related to the office supervisor. See Szymanowksi
No. 539.
You, thus, received compensation that was not part of that provided for
by law.
With relation to the fact that the auditors approved this compensation,
we note that this Commission has already held that township auditors have no
authority to fix compensation for township supervisors who are performing
duties outside of those fixed by law or for working in positions not
established in the township code. Nanovic, 85 -005. Thus, even though the
was
auditors may have indicated an approval for this "administrative pay" h
of no effect as the auditors did not have the power to fix a compensation that
was not allowed by law and that was regulated by statute (compensation as a
supervisor). We also note that in 1980, the funds were allocated not as
compensation but for reimbursement for expenses incurred rather than outside
meeting pay.
The funds received by you as "outside meeting pay" as outlined in thc
findings totalled $1,245.15. (Finding No. 5).
Our conclusion and the appropriate remedy in respect to this matter are
set forth further below.
II. Allegation: That you, a Supervisor in Girard. Township, violated Section
3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 403(a), 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 by receiving life and
hospitalization benefits from the township and by having received pension
benefits up to 1980 or 1981.
Mr. Rayn;and Finders
Page 8
A. Findins•
6. Finding nu:..iber 1 tlnreugh 5 ar incorporated herein by reference.
�`.
Girard Township records c3i sclo�e
that or supervisors entered into a Grou, Pension ( Annult,)�Plan, l #DA -153 with ship
Life Insurance Company. Columba
a. The plan was a Group Deposit .annuity contract. All supervisors and
full -time employees were eligible to participate.
b. The plan had 100% full and immediate vesting.
c. The application was signed by Girard Township Supervisors Korb Bryant
and Ray Sanders and was dated December 28, 1983.
d. The register and anniversary dates of the plan was listed as Octo',er
5, 1973.
8. Minutes of the township supervisors meeting of October 1, 1973 di sc14_,s,,s
on motion by Sanders, second by Korb Bryant and passed unanimously the
township approved the group pension plan as well as an accident and health
pizln with Columbia Insurance Company.
�• Township records confirm that from 1973 through 1981 the township
contributed a total of $2,325.27 to the Group Pension Plan on your behalf,
a. A Columbia Life Insurance pension account statement of DecembLr 31,
1935 disclosed a total vested benefit of $4,144.93.
�%• Contributions to the group annuity were di scontipued in 1981 upon the
advic-�- of Solicitor James Toohey that such contributions were improper.
Toohey presented, to the township, an opinion dated May 13, 1981 drafted
Toohey's law partner. That opinion cited the case of Hendricks v. East by
Rockhill Townshi 1 D & C 3d 163 1977
were improper. That opinion also stated �innpartld that such contributions
a. In addition to holding that supervisors per se are not ert1tled to
pension benefits, the case also holds that in this situation where
one or more of the supervisors are appointed as roadmaster, then in
that event the auditors must approve the payment into the pension
plan pursuant to 53 P.S. 65514 and 53 P.S. 65515.
As far as the mono( contributed to the plan on behalf of the
supervisors is concerned, it would be my opinion, based on the
Rockhil l Townshi case, ', tat money is properly the property of
the township and. should ba refunded.
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 9
11. Township officials confirm that in February, 1985 you received from
Columbia Life Insurance Company a check in the amount of $3,944.93 ($4,144.93
- $200.00 federal withholding tax).
a. Columbia sent that check to you after receiving a release
authorization for withdrawal of funds.
b. That release was signed on February 11, 1985 by you as township
employee and Supervisor William Borland as township official.
Reason for withdrawal cited as cut backs.
c. Also receiving pension benefits were former supervisors Fred
Park on February 15, 1980 in an amount of $2,434.42 and Korb Bryant
$3,377.06 on January 29, 1982.
12. Girard Township also paid accident and health and life insurance premiums
on your behalf to Columbia Life Insurance Company from 1976 through 1985 to
policy #KSM 0143. Payments were made on a quarterly basis as follows:
a. 1976: Accident & Health
Life
a. 1977: Accident and Health
Life
b, 1978: Accident and Health
Life
c. 1979: Accident and Health
Outpatient
Life
d. 1980: Accident and Health
Life
e. 1981: Accident and Health
Life
$ 649.92
85.80
$ 735.72
$ 697.44
85.80
$ 783.24
$ 767.20
85.80
$ 853.00
$ 767.20
240.25 (3 payments)
102.75
$1,110.20
737.56
85.80
$ 823.36
$ 801.88
85.80
$ 887.68
g. 1982: Accident and Health $ 601.41
Life 64.35
$ 665.76 (3 payments)
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 10
h. 1983: Accident and Heal, :h
$1,999.10
107.50
$2,106.60
i. 1984: Accident and Health
Life $1,892.96
85.80
Coverage Upgraded
9/14/82, premium
increase of $36.73
( payments)
$x:16
j. 1985: Accident and Health
Life $1,419.72 (3 payments)
$ 64.35
$1,484.
13. Prior to 1983 the township board of auditors did not approve accident
health and life insurance benefits for township supervisors (See Findin and
a. In 1983 the audit g 3 )
auditors approved a quarterly accident /health paymci of
$319.27 for you ($1,277.08 annually) and $21.45
($85.80) annually) . Records confirm that in 1983, life l o ance
a $2,106.96 was paid on your behalf for accident /health /life coverage
rather than the authorized $1,362.88, a difference of :744.08.
14. Records from the township disclosed that in 1984 and 1985
the t
solicitors were asked for opinions regarding accident and health insurancejfo
non - employee supervisors and part -time employee supervisors. for
a. By correspondence dated March 29, 1984 addressed to William Borland,
Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Solicitor Howard Rubenfic;d
issued an opinion that a non - employee supervisor may not partici t
in the township medical and hospitalization plan. Further, an
employee - supervisor may be covered only if such coverage ' is
specifically approved by the township auditors as part of the
employee- supervisors compensation.
b. By correspondence dated September 18, 1985 addressed to Daniel
Douglas, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Solicitor George
Schroeck issued an opinion that a part -time employee supervisor may
not participate in the township's medical and hospital or life
insurance plans. Further, an employee - supervisor may be covered only
if such coverage is specifically approved by the township auditors as
part of this compensation.
15. You were interviewed by a State Ethics Commission investigator on
November 18, 1986 and made the follgwing statements:
a. You were a township sup rvi sor in 1973 when a ension an
medical insurance started for all township employees andasupervisors.
Mr. Raymond N. Sanders
Page 11
b. The medical insurance plus pension was switched to Columbia because
you had a heart attack and the former provider (Provident Indemnity)
informed you that you were no longer eligible to continue in the
plan. Frank Giglotti, Columbia Insurance Company said you would be
eligible for their coverage, so the switch was made.
c. You needed the money received from the medical insurance to pay for
outstanding medi cal bills .
d. In 1982, while at a convention, you were informed about an Ethics
.Commission ruling to the effect that you were on the township
insurance plans illegally.
e. You and the other supervisors agreed not to cancel the insurance
because you hoped there would be a more favorable ruling from the
Ethics Commission or some other authority. This hope came from
information received at annual conventions of township supervisors.
f. The township discontinued paying into the pension plan in 1981.
Columbia Life Insurance Agent, Frank Giglotti, informed you the
pension money belonged to you, not the township. You personally
received and spent the pension money to pay bills.
h. The auditors informed the supervisors in the 1970's that the
supervisors should be reimbursed for attending the State
Association of Township Supervisors meetings and other meetings
related to the duties of a supervisor. An annual flat pay for
attending these flat ratetto and until
rate for when the
attending meetings.
i. If you had to pay back any money, you would take out a loan.
Former supervisors Korb Bryant and Fred Park also received cash
payments from the plan.
B. Discussion: _ As a township supervisor, you Ire §402public o f f ici a l a s t h a tr
term is defined in the State Ethics Act. P
conduct as such an official must, therefore, conform to the requirements of
the State Ethics Act.
Generally, the State Ethics Act provides as follows:
g.
J•
Mr.. Raymond H. Sanders
PagE 12
Section 3. Restricted activities.
(a) No public official or public employee shall use h'
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).
Within the above provision of law, this Commission has previously
determined that a township supervisor may not receive at the township`s
expense pension, health, hospitalization, medical and life insurance benefits
when such supervisor acts only in the capacity of a supervisor. Krane,
84 -001; Cowie, 84 -010. Additionally, even if such a supervisor is employed by
the township as a roadmaster in accordance with the Second Class Township
Code, such benefits are considered compensation and must, therefore, be fixed
as such by the township board of auditors. See Synoski v. Hazle Township,
Pa. Commw. , 500 A.2d 1282, (1985) ; In re: A. seal of the Auditors Resort
of Mond Creek Township, Pa. Commw. Ct. 12 ,
No. 3 8 -R. Any benefits received other than as ,
prov above, would
consitute a financial gain obtained in violation of the State Ethics Act.
See, McCutcheon v. State Ethics Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. 529, 466 A.2d 283,
(1983 ; Conrad v. Exeter Township, 27 D & C 3d 253, (1983). These principles
of law are now well se and constitute the law under which this situation
must be reviewed. See, In Re: Re ort of Audit or South Union Townshi , 47
Pa. Commw. 1, 407 A.2d 9 , 1979 .
In the instant situation, while you were not an appointed township
.roadrnaster, you did work on the township roads and, therefore, may have been
eligible to receive the in question benefits. Such, however, required
approval by the township board of auditors in order tp be considered part of
your authorized compensation. See, McCutcheon v. State Ethics CCAmmisSiO3,
supra. The facts in the instant situation clearly reveal that the auditors
never fixed as part of your compensation the pension benefits. You received a
financial gain in relation to these benefits - in the amount of $4,144.93 when
you cashed in the pension plan. (See Finding 11). As such there was a
violation of the State Ethics Act in relation to the pension benefits.
Additionally as noted r
you also received life and hospitalization
benefits as outlined in Finding 13.
Once again, whil
approval was required
In 1983 through
1983
1' ' 5
e you may have been eligible for such benefits, aud'i.or
. From 1980 through 1982 no such approval was obtained.
1985 approval was received as follows for your benefits:
Life Insurance
Hospitalization
21 .45 /quarter, $ 85.80 /year
319.27 /quarter, 1,277.08 /year
Total $1,362.88 `
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 13
1984 Life Insurance
Hospitalization
1985 Life Insurance
Hospitalization
The township expended and you, as supervisor, approved excess payment for your
benefits as follows:
1983 Total $2,106.96
As such in 1983, your received $744.08 in excess of that provided for by the
auditors.
Additionally and as noted, the township expended funds as follows in
1979 - 1982 when no auditor approval was obtained.
1979
1980
1981
1982
Total
Total
Total
Total
$1,110.75
823.36
887.68
665.76
$3,487.555
21.45 /quarter, $ 85.80 /year
473.24 /quarter, 1,892.96 /year
Total $1,988.76
21.45 /quarter, $ 85.80 /year
363.07 /quarter, 1,452.28/year
Total $1,538.08
The above plus the excess from 1983 ($744.08) equals $4,231.63.
It also should be noted that even if these benefits had been received in
good faith, such would not be controlling. Good faith receipt of such
benefits, even when based upon a solicitor's advice, will not alleviate the
necessity of a public official reimbursing his governmental body for the
receipt of a financial gain for which he was not entitled. See Allegheny
County v. Grier, 179 Pa. 639, 36 A. 353, (1897); McCutcheon v. State Ethics
Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. 539, 466 A.2d 283, (1983); Kestler Appeal, 66 Pa.
Comm. 1, 444 A.2d 761, (1982). As a result, we believe that you must
reimburse Girard Township for this financial gain.
The State Ethics Act provides as follows:
Section 9. Penalties.
(a) Any person who violates "the provisions of Section 3(a)
and (b) is guilty of a felony and shall be fined not more
than $10,000 or imprisonegi for not more than five years,
or be both fined and imprisoned. 65 P.S. 409(a).
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 14
(c) Any person who obtains financial
gain fr
any provision of this act, in addition to any�other
penalty provided by law, shall pay into the State
Treasury a sum of money equal to three times the
financial gain resulting from such violation. 65 P.S.
409(c).
In addition to the above, the State Ethics Act provides that the
Commission may forward the results of any investigation to the appropriate
prosecuting authority unless the alleged offender removes himself from the
conflict of interest by divesting himself of any financial gain received in
violation of the State Ethics Act. 65 P.S. §407 9 iii
v. State Ethics Commission, 77 Pa. Commw. § 529, 466 ( ) See also,
v. McCutcheon
Commission may order restitution of financial gains6 8
received in violation f
the law.)
In relation to allegations I and II as set forth, we believe that this
the appropriate remedy. ;s
C. Conclusion and Order: As a township supervisor, you are a public official
subject to the p of the State Ethics Act.
You used your public office, as a supervisor, to receive meeting pay,
pension benefits, and life health and accident insurance benefits that were
not part of the compensation provided by law. Such is a violation of the
State Ethics Act.
The financial gain received as a result of your activity is as follows:
A. Meeting Pay $1,245.15
B. Pension Benefits
C. Life /Health Insurance $4,31.64
Total $4,231.64
075217:77
You are hereby ordered to remit payment in the above amount to the State
Ethics Commission, payable to Girard Township within thirty days of the date
of this order.
i
Failure to comply with this order will result in a referral of this
matter to the appropriate law enforcement agency for futher civil or criminal
action.
Jur files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Section
8 (a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 404a). 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
Mr. Raymond H. Sanders
Page 15
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 rha shall bes fined
P.S. moore(e)an $ 1,000 or imprisoned
for not more than one year or
the Commission,
G. Sieber Pancoast
Chairman
•
Mr. Ray H. Sanders
7920 Cole Spring Road
Girard, PA 16417
Re: Order 572, File 85 -127 -C
JJC /na
cc: Public Binder.
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PA 17120
TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610
July 2, 1987
Dear Mr. Sanders:
On June 23, 1987, the State Ethics Commission approved your requested
payment method for reimbursing Girard Township as required by Order 572.
We have forwarded your check No. 1981 in the amount of $267.27 to the
township. We will expect checks in the amount of $267.27 on the first of each
month until the balance is paid in full.
This letter will be part of the Order and a public record as such.
Sincerely,
John J. Contino
Executive Director
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
RESOLUTION
And now this eighth day of April, 1988 at a duly called meeting of the
State Ethics Commission, the undersigned members of the State Ethics
Commission do hereby resolve as follows:
1. On June 2, 1987, the State Ethics Commission issued Order No. 572
finding that Raymond H. Sanders, a township supervisor in Gir.avd Township,
Erie County, Pennsylvania, had violated Section 3(a) of the State Ethics Act
to receive meeting pay, pension benefits and life and health and accident
insurance benefits that were not part of the compensation provided by law.
2. Said order determined that the financial gain received as a result of
such activity was as follows:
a. Meeting pay - $1,245.15
b. Pension benefits - 4,144.93
c. Life /health insurance 4,231.64
$9,621.72 Total
3. Said order required Raymond H. Sanders to make restitution to Girard
Township in the amount of $9,621.72 representing the financial gain received
in violation of the State Ethics Act.
4. By letter dated July 2, 1987, Mr. Sanders was advised that he would
be permitted to make said restitution over a period of three years at a rate
of $267.27 per month.
5. To date, Mr. Sanders has made restitution in the amount of $2,405.
6. On March 30 , 1988, House Bill 1577, Printer's No. 2672, was signed
into law by the Governor of Pennsylvania.
7. Said Bill, in substance, provides that no township supervisor who
received unauthorized pension, life, health, accident or medical insurance
during the period January 1, 1959 through and including March 31, 1985, shall
be subject to any penalty, assessment, surcharge, forfeiture or any
disciplinary action of any kind as a result of his or her participation in
said programs. Said law having been effective immediately. A review of the
underlying facts as outlined in Order No. 572 indicates that all of the
payments regarding the pension benefits received by Mr. Sanders at the
township's expense were made prior to March 31, 1985, and the cash surrender
value of said benefits were received prior to that time.
Page 2
8. A further review of Order No. 572 indicates that of the amount
assessed against Mr. Sanders for accident, health and life insurance was all
paid by the township prior to 1985 except for $1, 484.07. A further review of
said order indicates that the amount paid by the township in 1985 did, in
fact, have authorized auditor approval and therefore, was not assessed against
Mr. Sanders.
9. In light of the fact that House Bill 1577 would now prohibit the
assessment of a penalty for the receipt of these benefits paid prior to 1985
and whereas the only remaining item that would be assessed against Mr. Sanders
is the amount of funds expended by the township for outside meeting pay and,
in light of the fact that Mr. Sanders has made payment satisfying that amount,
it is hereby resolved that:
Mr. Sanders is discharged from any further obligation of payment to
Girard Township under Order No. 572. A copy of this resolution shall be
forwarded to Mr. Sanders and to the Secretary /Treasurer of Girard Township as
evidence of completion of all obligations under the previously issued order.
It is further directed that a copy of this resolution be placed in the public
files of the State Ethics Commission in relation to Order No. 572.
d ' J A
G. Sieber Pancoast, Chairman
Joseo6 Marsha ,
Josep W. Marsha , I
Vice Chairma
homas
ndrews, Member
Robert W. Brown, Member
csilytY4 Judge Robert D
y
A. Member
Denni s
. Harrington, Member
.° ; (
,!.
Helena G. Hughes, Me
er