Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1340 GoldingerIn Re: Dan E. Goldinger, Sr. File Docket: X -ref: Date Decided: Date Mailed: Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair John J. Bolger, Vice Chair Donald M. McCurdy Paul M. Henry Raquel K. Bergen 03 -010 Order No. 1340 9/20/04 10/01/04 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 Act, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. § 401 et seq., as codified by Act 93 of 1998, Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. A Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings were submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulation of Findings is quoted as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement was subsequently approved. Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter 11 of Act 93 of 1998, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., which essentially repeats Act 9 of 1989 and provides for the completion of pending matters under Act 93 of 1998. This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission is issued under Act 93 of 1998 and 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 Chapter 11 of Act 93 of 1998. Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Act is guilty of a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year. Confidentiality does not preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 2 I. ALLEGATION: That Dan Goldinger, a (public official /public employee) in his capacity as a supervisor of East Franklin Township, Armstrong County, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1105(b)(3)(4)(5) provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law (Act 93 of 1998) 65 Pa.C.S. § §1103(a) and 1105(b)(3)(4)(5) when he used the authority of his office for the private pecuniary gain of himself, members of his immediate family and /or businesses with which members of his immediate family are associated, including but not limited to participating in discussions and actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of the law firm that employs his wife; participating in discussions and actions of the board of supervisors to award contracts to companies that employ his son; use of township cellular telephones to place personal telephone calls; claiming both roadmaster pay and supervisor meeting pay for attending meetings of the board of supervisors during his regular working hours as township roadmaster; use of township equipment for the benefit of himself or a member of his immediate family; failing to disclose on Statements of Financial Interests filed for 1998, 1999 and 2001 any sources of income in excess of $1,300.00; and when he failed to disclose real estate interests and creditors on Statements of Financial Interests filed for the 2002 calendar year. II. FINDINGS: 1. Dan E. Goldinger, Sr. has served as a Supervisor for East Franklin Township, Armstrong County since January 1996. a. Goldinger has served as the appointed roadmaster for the township since at least February 1996. 1. Goldinger has annually been reappointed roadmaster by the board of supervisors. 2. Goldinger was employed by the township as full -time roadmaster until January 4, 2003, working forty (40) hours per week. a. From January 6, 2003 through May 11, 2003, Goldinger was furloughed from the roadmaster position. b. From May 12, 2003, through December 31, 2003, Goldinger worked on a part -time basis averaging twenty (20) hours per week. c. Since 1996 Goldinger has supervised the road department. 3. The township board of auditors has annually set the roadmaster's rate of compensation as follows since 1998: a. 1998: $13.25/Hr. b. 1999: $14.25/Hr. c. 2000: $15.00 /Hr. d. 2001: $15.00 /Hr. e. 2002: $15.45/Hr. f. The auditors also set other compensation for the roadmaster including, holidays, leave, overtime, mileage reimbursement, and health and life insurance. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 3 The following findings relate to Goldinger's participation in discussions and actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of the law firm that employed his wife. 4. Beginning in 1998, the supervisors have annually appointed Jack Steiner of the firm of Steiner and Steiner, Kittanning, PA as the township solicitor. a. Jack Steiner typically handles East Franklin Township issues for the firm. 5. Steiner's firm replaced David Suckling, the township solicitor for many years, who was retiring. 6. The board of supervisors initially appointed Steiner as the solicitor during the reorganization meeting on January 5, 1998. a. Goldinger made the motion and voted in favor of appointing Steiner. b. This vote passed unanimously with a 3 -0 vote. 7 Peg Goldinger is the wife of Dan Goldinger. 8. Peg Goldinger, has been employed as a secretary at Steiner and Steiner since January 1992. a. Peg Goldinger primarily provides clerical support for Attorney Cindy Calarie, an associate in the firm. b. At times, Peg Goldinger does answer the phone or run errands directly for Jack Steiner. c. Peg Goldinger does not perform any duties associated with East Franklin Township. 9. On January 19, 1998, Steiner met with the board of supervisors (Goldinger, Dean Hepler, and James Stuchell) to discuss the terms of his representation. a. During this meeting, Peg Goldinger's employment at the firm was discussed. b. The supervisors agreed with Steiner that Peg Goldinger's employment would not cause a conflict of interest. 10. On January 26, 1998, Hepler, as chairman of the board of supervisors, signed a retainer letter from Steiner agreeing to the terms of Steiner's representation. a. Attached to the retainer letter was an addendum addressing, in part, Peg Goldinger's employment at the firm. 11. The portion of the addendum relating to Peg Goldinger provided as follows: "I want to confirm that we have discussed the fact that the wife of Supervisor Dan Goldinger is employed by this firm. You have agreed that this is not a conflict. I have also informed you the Mrs. Goldinger, as a member of our support staff is principally responsible for assisting Ms. Calarie." 12. Goldinger has participated in board actions appointing Steiner and Steiner as the solicitor at reorganization meetings of East Franklin Township in each of the years Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 4 subsequent to 1998 through 2003, relying on Steiner's representations. 13. Steiner invoiced the township and was paid $44,258.83 for his services from 1998 through 2003. 14. The supervisors vote to approve the payment of monthly bills at their regular monthly meetings in a group consensus fashion. a. Approval of bills, including payroll, is typically done after the fact, as the secretary /treasurer has the authority to pay the bills as they are received at the township office. b. Individual votes are not typically noted in the meeting minutes. 15. Signature authority on township financial accounts lies with the secretary /treasurer and all three supervisors. a. Township checks require three signatures: the secretary /treasurer and two supervisors. 16. Goldinger participated in votes approving payments and signing township checks to Steiner and Steiner from 1998 through 2003. These votes were unanimous. The following findings relate to Goldinger's participation in discussions and actions of the board of supervisors to award contracts to companies that employed his son. 17. East Franklin Township annually publicly bids and contracts with companies to provide road oil and paving services for the township. 18. Goldinger, as roadmaster, is primarily responsible for determining the scope of road oil and paving contracts. 53 P.S. 67302. a. This includes the amount of road oil needed, roads to be paved, and the type of paving used. 19. Goldinger's son, Danny E. Goldinger, Jr., has been employed as a laborer by road paving and supply companies since 1997 who have had contracts with East Franklin Township as follows: a. April 11, 1997 - February 8, 2000: Winters and Fleming, Inc. b. April 24, 2000 - Present: Russell Standard, Inc. 20. Goldinger's son was hired by Winters and Fleming following a spring 1997 site visit at East Franklin Township by Rodger Fleming, President of Winters and Fleming. a. Fleming met with Goldinger for a pre -bid site visit and Goldinger mentioned that his son was looking for a job. b. A short time after that conversation Dan Goldinger, Jr., visited Fleming at his office and asked if he could fill out an application for employment. c. Fleming was in need of a laborer at that time and decided to hire Dan Goldinger, Jr. d. Goldinger, Jr., remained employed by Winters and Fleming until April 2000 when he obtained employment with Russell Standard. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 5 21. Since 1998 both Winters and Fleming, Inc., and Russell Standard, Inc., have been awarded road maintenance contracts by East Franklin Township. 22. Goldinger has participated in various board of supervisor actions resulting in and relating to contracts with Winters and Fleming and Russell Standard, companies that employ(ed) his son, from 1998 through 2003. a. b. Goldinger has participated in drafting bid specifications as required by 53 P.S. 67302. All of these votes were unanimously approved. 23. Dan Goldinger, Jr., worked as a laborer of Winters and Fleming on paving projects awarded by East Franklin Township. 24. Dan Goldinger, Jr. was a salaried employee of Winters and Fleming from 1998 through 1999. 25. Winters and Fleming were also awarded bids for road projects by East Franklin Township in calendar year 2000 after Goldinger's son was no longer employed. 26. Since April 2000 while his son has been employed by Russell Standard, Goldinger participated in actions of the board of supervisors to award contracts to Russell Standard. These were unanimous votes. 27. Dan Goldinger, Jr., worked as a Russell Standard laborer on paving projects in East Franklin Township. 28. Dan Goldinger, Jr. was a salaried employee of Russell Standard from 2001 through 2003. The following findings relate to Goldinger's use of township cellular telephones to place personal telephone calls. 29. Between1998 and 2003, the township obtained cellular telephone service from Cellular One. a. The township discontinued its cell phone service in early 2004. 30. The township had three cell phones with Cellular One numbers assigned to them. a. One cellular telephone number was assigned to Goldinger in his capacity as roadmaster. b. The other two phones /numbers were assigned to the township police department. 31. The township does not permit personal use of township equipment, materials, supplies, etc. for personal use. a. The township does not have a formal written policy forbidding the use of township equipment for personal use. 32. On several occasions from 1998 through 2003, Goldinger used the township phone assigned to him for use in his capacity as roadmaster to make calls of a personal nature. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 6 a. Goldinger placed these calls while on personal out -of -state trips. 33. Goldinger made ten personal calls utilizing the township cell phone from 1998 through May 2002. 34. Seven of the ten personal calls were made to Goldinger's home telephone number to see if he was needed by the township. 35. The total value of the personal telephone calls made by Goldinger was $54.62. The following findings relate to Goldinger claiming both roadmaster and supervisor's meeting pay for attending meetings of the board of supervisors during his regular working hours. 36. East Franklin Township has conducted board of supervisors meetings during morning and afternoon hours. a. These meetings include regularly scheduled board of supervisor meetings, special meetings, public hearings, work sessions, and executive sessions. b. Goldinger, in his capacity as a supervisor, typically attends these meetings. 37. These meetings have occasionally coincided with Goldinger's work hours (7 am to 3 pm) as a township roadmaster. a. Meetings would generally be at least one -half (1/2) hour in length but could be as long as two hours. 38. Goldinger, in his capacity as township roadmaster, generally works a shift of 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. a. Goldinger's duties consist mainly of supervising the road crew. b. Goldinger will work with the road crew maintaining township roads. 39. A review of township meeting minutes and time sheets confirms that Goldinger attended daytime meetings of the board of supervisors from 1998 through 2003 during his regular hours as township roadmaster. 40. Employees in the road department, including Goldinger, submit their hours for the week on time records to the township secretary for preparation of the payroll. a. From at least January 1998 through approximately December 16, 2002, payroll information was submitted to the secretary on Weekly Time Tickets. 1. The time tickets contained information including the week; day; hours for day; and total hours for week. b. From approximately December 16, 2002 through the present, the township has utilized a time clock that is used by the secretary to determine payroll. 1. The time cards only reflect the date; start and end times for each day; and total hours claimed for the week. 41. Goldinger was compensated as a roadmaster for attending meetings of the board of supervisors from 1998 through 2003 on the following dates: Meeting Date Meeting Type Meeting Length 04/13/98 Regular .50 09/07/99* Regular .50 02/01/00 Regular .25 05/04/00 Regular .25 11/14/00 Regular .50 11/17/00 Regular .50 01/03/01 Exec. Session .75 01/08/01 Exec. Session .50 02/02/01 Exec. Session 2.0 02/26/01 Exec. Session 2.0 03/09/01 Public Hearing .50 03/21/01 Regular .25 08/09/01 Regular .30 08/14/01 Regular .25 09/05/01 Regular .50 01/10/02 Work Session 1.0 02/14/02 Work Session 1.0 03/14/02 Regular 2.0 04/11/02 Regular .25 04/18/02 Regular .25 05/09/02 Work Session 1.0 06/18/02 Work Session 1.0 07/11/02 Work Session 1.0 09/12/02 Work Session 1.0 09/30/02 Regular .50 11/14/02 Regular 1.75 Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 7 42. Goldinger was compensated as roadmaster for attending meetings of the board of supervisors as follows: Year Rate of Pay Hours Compensation 1998 $13.25 /hour .50 $ 6.63 1999 $14.25 /hour .50 $ 7.13 2000 $15.08 /hour 1.50 $ 22.50 2001 $15.00 /hour 7.05 $ 105.75 2002 $15.45 /hour 10.00 $ 154.50 Total $ 296.51 The following findings relate to Goldinger's use of township equipment for his personal use. 43. The township does not permit personal use of township equipment, supplies, materials, etc. by township officials or personnel. a. This policy is not written. 44. Goldinger's son, Daniel Goldinger, Jr., resides in East Franklin Township on Walkchalk Road. 45. In or around the fall of 2000, Goldinger used a township loader on property owned by his mother, located on Walkchalk Road. a. Goldinger used the loader for at least one and a half hours to move a tree that had fallen on the property due to a storm. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 8 b. The tree was not blocking a road and was not a public safety issue. c. Goldinger drove the loader from the township maintenance building to remove a tree blocking a public road. On his way back, while driving past his mother's property, he moved the tree and then returned to the maintenance building after its use. 1. The round trip distance was approximately two miles. 46. From approximately April 1996 until April 2001, the township owned a 1996 Case J.I. Model 621BXT rubber -tired loader. a. The township obtained the loader from Shaull Equipment, Lemoyne, PA, on a lease -to -own program. 47. Shaull Equipment leases heavy equipment to private individuals on a weekly and monthly basis. a. Shaull Equipment's weekly rental of a Case J.I. Model 621 was $1,000.00 per week in 2000. b. This rental rate was effective from November 1999 through November 2001. 48. The value attributed to the use of the loader by Goldinger equaled $142.86. a. Gain based on one -day rental of loader from Shaull Equipment. ($1000.00 divided by 7 days= $142.86 per day) b. Goldinger's use of township equipment eliminated the need for him or his son to rent equipment at their own expense. The following findings relate to Goldinger's failure to disclose information on his SFIs for calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002. 49. Goldinger, in his capacity as a supervisor and roadmaster for East Franklin Township, has annually filed Statements of Financial Interests (SFI) by May 1 of each year for the proceeding calendar year. 50. Goldinger filed SFIs with the township as follows for calendar years 1998 through 2002: Calendar Year Date Filed 1998 02/15/99 on SEC Form 1/99 1999 01/31/00 on SEC Form 1/00 2000 03/02/01 on SEC Form 1/01 2001 01/11/02 on SEC Form 01/02 2002 02/21/03 on SEC Form 01/03 51. Goldinger failed to disclose any direct or indirect sources of income for calendar year 1998. a. Goldinger failed to disclose income as roadmaster from East Franklin Township for calendar year 1998. 52. Goldinger failed to disclose all direct or indirect sources of income for calendar year 1999. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 9 a. Goldinger failed to disclose income as roadmaster from East Franklin Township for calendar year 1999. 53. Goldinger failed to complete block 06 (Occupation) and disclose all direct or indirect sources of income for calendar year 2001. a. Goldinger failed to disclose income as roadmaster from East Franklin Township for calendar year 2001. 54. Goldinger failed to complete blocks 08(Real Estate Interests) and 09(Creditors) on his SFI for calendar year 2002. 55. W -2 Wage and Tax Statements on file at the township verify that Goldinger received more than $1,300 annually as roadmaster from East Franklin Township in calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002, years in which he failed to complete or disclose information SFIs. III. DISCUSSION: At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Dan E. Goldinger, Sr. hereinafter Goldinger, has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law 26, 65 P.S. § 401, et seq., as codified by the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 93 of 1998, Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq., which Acts are referred to herein as the "Ethics Act." The allegations are that Goldinger, as an East Franklin Township Supervisor, Armstrong County, violated Sections 1103(a) and 1105(b)(3)(4)(5) of the Ethics Act when he participated in board actions resulting in the hiring of the law firm that employs his wife, and awarding of township contracts to companies that employed his son; used the township cellular telephone for personal use; claimed both roadmaster pay and supervisor meeting pay for attending board meetings during his regular working hours as township roadmaster; used township equipment for the benefit of his mother; failed to disclose on Statements of Financial Interests (SFI's) filed for 1998, 1999 and 2001 any sources of income in excess of $1,300.00; and failed to disclose real estate interests and creditors on SFI's filed for the 2002 calendar year. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 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 93 of 1998 as follows: Section 1102. 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 Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 10 business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. 65 Pa. C. S. § 1102. Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official /public employee from using the authority of public office /employment or confidential information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public official /public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Sections 1105(b)(3), (4) and (5) of the Ethics Act requires a public official /public employee to include the following information on his SFI: (3) Any direct or indirect interest in any real estate which was sold or leased to the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions or purchased or leased from the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions or which was the subject of any condemnation proceedings by the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions. (4) The name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in excess of $6,500 and the interest rate thereon. However, loans or credit extended between members of the immediate family and mortgages securing real property which is the principal or secondary residence of the person filing shall not be included. The name and address of any direct or indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate $1,300 or more. However, this provision shall not be construed to require the divulgence of confidential information protected by statute or existing professional codes of ethics or common law privileges. Section 1105(b)(3) quoted above requires that every public official /public employee and candidate list real estate interests sold, purchased, leased or condemned by the Commonwealth or an agency or political subdivision thereof. Section 1105(b)(4) quoted above requires that every public official /public employee and candidate list the name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in excess of $6,500 and the interest rate. Section 1105(b)(5) quoted above requires that every public official /public employee and candidate list the name and address of any direct or indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate of $1,300 or more. As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are reproduced above as the Findings of this Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein. (5) Goldinger has served as an East Franklin Township Supervisor since 1996, a full - time roadmaster from February 1996 to January 2003, and a part -time worker from May 2003 through December 31, 2003. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 11 Beginning in 1998, the board appointed Jack Steiner of the firm Steiner and Steiner as the township solicitor. Peg Goldinger, Goldinger's spouse, had been employed by Steiner and Steiner as a secretary since January of 1992. In January of 1998, Goldinger made the motion to appoint Steiner as the solicitor which passed on a 3 -0 vote. Goldinger also participated at the 1998 through 2003 reorganizational meetings in re- appointing that firm as the township solicitor. In 1998, the three supervisors and Steiner met on the issue of Peg Goldinger's employment with the firm. It was the consensus among the supervisors and Steiner that Peg Goldinger's employment was not a basis for a conflict. That consensus was reflected in an addendum to the retainer letter to the township from Steiner dated January 26, 1998. Goldinger also participated in unanimous votes of the board to approve payments and co- signed township checks to Steiner and Steiner from 1998 through 2003. In a separate matter, the township annually solicits bids for contracts to provide road oil and paving services in the township. Goldinger, as roadmaster, had primary responsibility for determining the scope of the road oil and paving contracts. Dan E. Goldinger, Jr., Goldinger's son, has been employed as a laborer by the road paving and supply companies Winters and Fleming, Inc. and Russell Standard, Inc. between 1997 and the present. Both of those companies had had contracts with the township. When the president of Winters and Fleming, Inc. met with Goldinger for a pre -bid site visit as to a township project, Goldinger mentioned that his son was looking for a job. Shortly thereafter, Goldinger's son visited Fleming at his office to fill out an application. Since Fleming was in need of a laborer at the time, he decided to hire Goldinger's son who remained with Winters and Fleming until he obtained employment with Russell Standard. Goldinger participated in various board actions as to contracts with the two businesses that employed his son between 1998 and 2003. In all instances, the votes for approval were unanimous. From April of 2000 while Goldinger's son was employed by Russell Standard, Goldinger participated in unanimous votes of the board to award contracts to that business. Goldinger's son worked for both companies on paving projects awarded by the township and Goldinger's son was a salaried employee by one firm and then the other. In another unrelated matter, the township obtained cell phone service between 1998 and 2003. The township had three cell phones, one of which was assigned to Goldinger in his capacity as a roadmaster. Although the township did not permit the personal use of the township equipment, materials or supplies, Goldinger used the township cell phone assigned to him to make calls of a personal nature on several occasions. Goldinger made ten personal calls using the township cell phone from 1998 through May of 2002, seven of which were made to his home telephone to see if he was needed by the township. The total value of the personal calls made by Goldinger amounted to $54.62. Another instance of Goldinger's conduct concerned the compensation he received as roadmaster and supervisor. The regularly scheduled board of supervisors' meetings on occasion coincided with Goldinger's work hours. As the township roadmaster, Goldinger generally worked 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The township meeting minutes and time sheets of Goldinger reflect that he attended daytime meetings of the board of supervisors from 1998 through 2003 during his regular working hours as township roadmaster. Goldinger received compensation as a roadmaster for attending meetings of the board of supervisors between the years 1998 and 2002 in the total amount of $296.51. See, Fact Findings 41, 42. Another activity of Goldinger that is subject to review involves the use of township equipment for personal use. As noted above, the township does not permit personal use of township equipment, supplies or material by township officials or personnel. However, in the fall of 2000, Goldinger used the township loader on property owned by his mother for the purpose of moving a tree that had fallen on her property during a storm. Even though the tree was not blocking a road and was not a public safety issue, Goldinger drove the Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 12 township loader to his mother's property to move the tree. Using comparable rental values, the gain attributed to the use of the township loader by Goldinger for personal use was $142.86. The last aspect of Goldinger's conduct involves the filing of SFI's for the calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001 and 2002. Although Goldinger timely filed his SFI's, he failed to disclose direct or indirect sources of income for the calendar years 1998, 1999 and 2001 involving the compensation he received as a township roadmaster. For the calendar year 2001 SFI, Goldinger also failed to complete Block 6 listing his occupation. For the SFI calendar year 2002, Goldinger failed to complete Block 8 on real estate interests and Block 9 as to creditors. The W -2 Wage and Tax Statements on file for Goldinger reflect that he received income as a roadmaster in the calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002 in excess of the $1,300 threshold but failed to complete or disclose information on those SFI's. Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case. The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations. The Consent Agreement proposes that this Commission find: "a. That a technical violation of Section 1103(a), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law occurred when Goldinger participated in discussions and actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of the law firm that employs his wife and the award of contracts to companies that employ his son. b. That no violation of Section 1103(a), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law occurred when Goldinger utilized township cellular telephones to place personal telephone calls, as any such use was de minimis. c. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law occurred when Goldinger claimed and was compensated as roadmaster while attending supervisor meetings of the board of supervisors during his regular working hours as township roadmaster[.] d. That an unintentional violation of Section 1103(a), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law occurred when Goldinger utilized a township loader for personal purposes. e. That unintentional violations of Section 1105(b), 65 Pa.C.S. §1105(b) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law occurred when Goldinger failed to disclose on Statements of Financial Interests filed for 1998, 1999 and 2001 any sources of income in excess of $1,300.00; and when he failed to complete sections 8 and 9 of the Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2002." In addition, Goldinger agrees to pay $500 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through this Commission within thirty (30) days of the mailing of this order. The allegations will now be addressed seriatim. Regarding Goldinger's actions as to the hiring of the law firm that employed his spouse and awarding township contracts to companies that employed his son, there were uses of authority of office on the part of Goldinger. But for the fact that Goldinger was a supervisor, he would not have been in a position to make and vote in favor of motions that appointed Steiner as solicitor while Steiner's firm employed his spouse as a secretary. Goldinger also participated as to the reappointments of Steiner at subsequent reorganizational meetings. Lastly, Goldinger Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 13 participated in votes to approve payments and co -sign checks to the Steiner firm. All such actions were uses of authority of office. See, Juliante, Order 809. Another circumstance involving uses of authority of office by Goldinger involved voting to award township contracts to companies that employed his son. Goldinger specifically met with the president of one company that received township contracts and indicated that his son was looking for a job. Goldinger participated in board actions awarding township contracts to those two firms that employed his son. Such were also uses of authority of office. The uses of authority of office resulted in private pecuniary benefits to Goldinger's spouse and son who are members of his immediate family as that term is defined under the Ethics Act. There were private pecuniary benefits consisting of the salary that Goldinger's spouse received from the law firm which was appointed solicitor and Goldinger's son received from the two different firms which were awarded township contracts. Accordingly, Goldinger technically violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he participated in actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of a law firm that employed his wife, and the award of township contracts to two companies that employed his son. See, Garris, Order 1312. The next allegation concerns Goldinger's use of a township cell phone for personal calls. The stipulated findings reflect that Goldinger made ten personal calls from 1998 through May of 2002 using the township cell phone which was to be only used for official business. Since seven of the ten calls were made to Goldinger's home to see if he was needed by the township, only three of the calls were personal. The total for those three calls amounted to $54.62. Although there was a use of authority of office on the part of Goldinger which resulted in a private pecuniary benefit to himself, there is an exception to the definition of conflict relating to de minimis matters. As we noted in Schweinsburq, Order 900, the issue of de minimis is decided on a case by case basis looking at the totality of the facts and circumstances in this case. Given such circumstances, one of which being that the amount involved was only $54.62, we find that this action was de minimis. Accordingly, Goldinger did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when on three occasions he used the township cellular phone to place personal calls amounting to $54.62 in that such action was de minimis. The third allegation concerns the issue of whether Goldinger, as an elected township official /supervisor and as a working township employee /roadmaster, received compensation in excess of that provided for by law. The stipulated findings reflect that there were instances when Goldinger attended meetings of the board of supervisors while he received compensation as a working township roadmaster. We have held that a township supervisor as a working employee cannot receive compensation as a township employee for performing his duties as an elected township supervisor. See, Hessinqer, Order 931, Wasiela, Order 932, reversed in part in part H &W v State Ethics Commission, 673 A.2d 1004 (1996) (Commw. Ct.). The record reflects for the years 1998 through 2002, Goldinger received compensation in the amount of $296.51 as a roadmaster for attending meetings of the board of supervisors. These were uses of authority of office on the part of Goldinger. By virtue of being the township supervisor, Goldinger was able to attend those meetings and submit time cards as an employee for payment while attending those meetings. The use of authority of office resulted in private pecuniary benefits consisting of $296.51 that was not authorized in law. Lastly, that private pecuniary benefit inured to Goldinger himself. Accordingly, Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed and received compensation as a roadmaster for attending supervisors meetings during his regular working hours as township roadmaster. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 14 The fourth allegation concerns Goldinger's use of township equipment for personal use. The findings of record reflect that Goldinger took the township loader to his mother's property and spent approximately one and one -half hours to move a tree that had fallen as the result of a storm. Goldinger then returned the loader to the maintenance building. Based upon comparable values, it is estimated that the use of the loader had an equivalent cost of $142.86. The actions of Goldinger were uses of authority of office. Goldinger was able to take the township loader to his mother's property and do personal work there by virtue of his elected position with the township. That use of authority of office resulted in a private pecuniary benefit consisting of the savings that Goldinger had by not having to privately rent a loader to do that work. Lastly, that private pecuniary benefit inured to Goldinger's mother who is a member of his immediate family as that term is defined under the Ethics Act. Accordingly, Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he utilized the township loader to do personal work on his mother's property. See, Reis, Order 1283. The last allegation concerns matters of SFI's that Goldinger filed for the calendar years 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2002. The stipulated findings reflect that for the calendar years 1998, 1999 and 2001, Goldinger had sources of income from the township in excess of $1,300 but failed to list such income on those SFI's. For the 2001 calendar year SFI, Goldinger failed to complete Block 6. For the calendar year 2002 SFI, Goldinger failed to complete Block 8 relating to real estate interests and Block 9 relating to creditors. Accordingly, Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act when he failed to disclose income from the township in excess of $1,300 for the calendar years 1998, 1999 and 2001 and failed to complete Block 8, Real Estate Interest, and Block 9, creditors, on his SFI for the calendar year 2002. If Goldinger has not already done so, he is directed within 30 days of the date of mailing of this order to file amended SFI's for the calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002 listing the financial interests as noted above and completing the blocks that he left blank. We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth the proper disposition for this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis and the totality of the facts and circumstances. Accordingly, Goldinger is directed to make payment of $500.00 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through this Commission within 30 days of the mailing of this order. If Goldinger has not already done so, he is directed within 30 days of the date of mailing of this order to file amended SFI's for the calendar years 1998, 1999, 2001, and 2002 listing the financial interests as noted above and completing the blocks that he left blank. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Dan E. Goldinger, Sr., as an East Franklin Township Supervisor, Armstrong County, is a public official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989 as codified by Act 93 of 1998. 2. Goldinger technically violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he participated in actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of a law firm that employed his wife, and the awarding of township contracts to two companies that employed his son. 3. Goldinger did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when on three occasions he used the township cellular phone to place personal calls amounting to $54.62 in that such action was de minimis. Goldinger, 03 -010 Page 15 4. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed and received compensation as a roadmaster for attending supervisors meetings during his regular working hours as township roadmaster. 5. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he utilized the township loader to do personal work on his mother's property. 6. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act when he failed to disclose income from the township in excess of $1,300 for the calendar years 1998, 1999, and 2001 and failed to complete Block 8, Real Estate Interest, and Block 9, creditors, on his SFI for the calendar year 2002. In Re: Dan E. Goldinger, Sr. ORDER NO. 1340 File Docket: 03 -010 Date Decided: 9/20/04 Date Mailed: 10/1/04 1 Dan E. Goldinger, Sr., as an East Franklin Township Supervisor, Armstrong County, technically violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he participated in actions of the board of supervisors resulting in the hiring of a law firm that employed his wife, and the awarding of township contracts to two companies that employed his son. 2. Goldinger did not violate Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when on three occasions he used the township cellular phone to place personal calls amounting to $54.62 in that such action was de minimis. 3. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he claimed and received compensation as a roadmaster for attending supervisors meetings during his regular working hours as township roadmaster. 4. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he utilized the township loader to do personal work on his mother's property. 5. Goldinger unintentionally violated Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act when he failed to disclose income from the township in excess of $1,300 for the calendar years 1998, 1999, and 2001 and failed to complete Block 8, Real Estate Interest, and Block 9, creditors, on his SFI for the calendar year 2002. 6. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Goldinger is directed to make payment of $500.00 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through this Commission within 30 days of the mailing of this order. 7 If Goldinger has not already done so, he is directed within 30 days of the date of mailing of this order to file amended SFI's for the calendar years 1998 through 2002 listing the financial interests as noted above and completing the blocks on the form. 8. Compliance with paragraphs 6 and 7 will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Louis W. Fryman, Chair