Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1854 NeelyiS;a R PHONE: 717-783-1610 STATE ETHICS COMMISSION TOLL FREE: 1-800-932-0936 FINANCE BUILDING 613 NORTH STREET, ROOM 309 HARRISBURG, PA 17120-0400 In Re: Scott Neely, File Docket: 24-0113-C Respondent Order No. 1854 Date Decided: 4/16/26 Date Mailed: 4/23/26 Before: Michael A. Schwartz, Chair David L. Reddecliff, Vice Chair Paul E. Parsells Robert P. Caruso Emilia McKee Vassallo This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission. FACSIMILE; 717-787-0806 WEBSITE: www. ethics. pamov Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa. C.S. § 1101 et sec ., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Findings in this Order are derived fiom the parties' Stipulation of Findings. The Consent Agreement has been approved. I. ALLEGATIONS: That Scott Neely, a public official as a Member of Council for Lewis Run Borough ("Borough"), McKean County, Pennsylvania, violated Sections 1103(a), 1105(a), and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10) of the Ethics Act: (1) When he lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough to Neely Communications, Inc., resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to Neely Communications, Inc., a business with which his son is associated; (2) When he filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address; and (3) When he filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2024 when he failed to include the following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more; the name and address of the Neely, 24-0113-C Page 2 source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. II. FINDINGS: 1. Scott Neely ("Neely") has served as a Member of Lewis Run Borough ("Borough") Council ("Council") from January 2, 2024, through the present. 2. The Borough is governed by a five -Member Council and a Mayor who participates at Council meetings but does not have voting privileges. 3. Council holds one meeting a month on the second Tuesday in the Borough building. 4. Council Members are provided with a meeting packet at each meeting that consists of the agenda, previous month's meeting minutes, treasurer's report, bill list, correspondence, bid documents, and proposals, 5. The bill list identifies the vendor and amount to be paid. a. A specific vote is taken at each meeting to approve the bill list presented. b. The bills are not paid until Council votes to approve the bill list. 6. The Borough maintains its general fund account at CNB Bank. a. Signature authority is held by the Council President, Vice President, and Pro Tem. b. Two signatures are required on each check. 7. Quotes for projects are provided in paper form to each Council Member to review at the time of the appropriate meeting. a. A vote is required to be taken by Council to approve any quotes for projects occurring within the Borough. b. Multiple quotes are generally obtained and provided to Council for comparison purposes. 8. Quotes are generally gathered by the Borough Secretary/Treasurer, Joanne Caldwell ("Caldwell"). a. Any Council Member has the ability to request quotes from various businesses. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 3 b. If a Council Member receives a quote, it is ultimately given to Caldwell to add to the meeting materials for distribution. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO HOW NEELY COMMUNICATIONS INC. INSTALLED A SECURITY SYSTEM FOR THE BOROUGH. 9. The Borough buildings did not have a professional security system in place prior to January 2024. a. A Ring camera was in the window of the Borough meeting room which only showed the front area of the Borough building and the street. 1. The camera was utilized to monitor weather conditions in the winter for the road crew. 10. The Borough building had few to no security issues as of January 1, 2024. 11. Council began discussing the possibility of obtaining a security system in approximately February 2024. a. The idea of a security system for the Borough originated with Council Vice President Jenna Zetwick ("Zetwick"). 12. At the February 13, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick discussed the difference between wireless and wired cameras. a. No quotes were presented at the February 13, 2024, meeting. 1. Zetwick expressed that she would have quotes the following month. 13. Neely Communications Inc. ("NCI") has been in business since 2009 and is owned and operated by Chad Neely ("C. Neely") and his wife Jennifer Neely ("J. Neely"), a. J. Neely is the President of NCI and C. Neely is the Vice President of NCI. b. NCI is located in Erie, Pennsylvania. 14. NCI specializes in structure cabling, fiber optics, surveillance systems, access control, overhead paging, posted phone systems, and light electrical work. a. NCI performs services for both personal home systems and business systems. b. C. Neely is responsible for estimating and overseeing projects. 1. C. Neely travels to potential project sites to generate price estimates for the projects that include materials and labor. Neely, 24-0I 13-C Page 4 C. J. Neely is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the business but also completes some estimating and project oversight as needed. 15. NO does both Wi-Fi based systems and wired systems. a. A wired system is generally safer for the consumer as it eliminates the ability for individuals to hack into the security system through Wi-Fi. b. Wi-Fi-based cameras are typically seen through Ring and Blink cameras and only work when connected to a Wi-Fi base. 16. NCI generally attempts to get a 20% profit from each of its jobs. a. The 20% profit is calculated and put into each proposal by C. Neely. 17, C. Neely is the son of Neely. 18. Neely initiated contact with C. Neely via phone to inquire if NCI would be interested in offering its security services to the Borough. a. The Borough did not formally contact NO to request a proposal. 1. Neely did not know specifically what the Borough wanted in its system when he called C. Neely. 19. C. Neely scheduled a walkthrough of the Borough properties with Neely to assess system needs and generate an estimate. a. The walkthrough occurred on or prior to February 23, 2024. 1. The walkthrough included the Borough main maintenance building, small maintenance building, and office building. b. The walkthrough was completed by Neely, C. Neely, and J. Neely. 20. During the walkthrough, Neely pointed out the areas of concern to C. Neely and J. Neely. a. These areas included the rear of the Borough building, the front of the Borough building, and the maintenance building. 21. C. Neely put a proposal together for the Borough based on the walkthrough and speaking with Neely. a. Neely did not discuss getting quotes from any other companies or a price limit during the walkthrough. 22. C. Neely was aware that a vote had to be taken by Council to approve the project. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 5 23. On February 23, 2024, C. Neely emailed Zetwick a proposal for the services NCI could provide to the Borough. a. The proposal included work for the main maintenance building, small maintenance building, and office building and adding card readers on one of the doors at each of the three buildings. 1. The total cost of the project identified on the proposal was $10,573. aa. $7,942 of the total was for work being completed in/on the buildings. bb. $2,631 of the total was for the card reader system. b. Zetwick is Neely's stepdaughter. 24. Zetwick responded on February 26, 2024, asking if there was a way that NCI could make the proposal more affordable for the Borough. a. C. Neely responded on February 27, 2024, suggesting a "bare minimum" system and removing the installation of the antenna. 1. The antennas would have to be installed by the Borough's employees, which would save the Borough money. 25. The first revision of the proposal was dated February 27, 2024. a. The proposal consisted of the same work identified on the original proposal with the exception of labor for installation of the antennas, 1. The total cost of the project identified on the proposal was $8,526. aa. $5,895 of the total was for work being completed in/on the buildings. bb. $2,631 was for the card reader system. 26. On March 1, 2024, Zetwick asked via email if C. Neely could send a "bare minimum" quote. a. Zetwick requested the quote to have it present for a vote at the March 12, 2024, Council meeting. 27. C. Neely sent the second revision of the proposal on March 1, 2024, via email. a. The proposal identified one option for a scope of work on the maintenance building. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 6 b. The proposal identified three options for a scope of work on the Borough office building. 28. At the March 12, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick went over the quote for cameras from NCI. a. The subject of the cameras was tabled to the following meeting. b. Council announced that a work session was to be held on March 26, 2024, to discuss the cameras. 29. A work session occurred on March 26, 2024, at the Borough building in which J. Neely participated over the phone. a. The work session was held to discuss the cameras. b. Only Neely, Zetwick, and Council President Jim Coldren were present at the work session. 30. On April 11, 2024, Zetwick emailed C. Neely and asked him to send over the new quote that they had discussed at the work session. C. Neely sent the third revision of the proposal to Zetwick on April 12, 2024. 31. The third revision of the proposal, dated April 12, 2024, identified work to be completed at the main maintenance building and office building. a. The proposal totaled $5,646 and included the following: Maintenance Building • NCI will provide and install one 2MP bullet camera on the exterior, focusing on the overhead bay doors and man door. • Provide and install one 2MP bullet camera on the exterior, focusing on the overhead bay doors on the Main Street side of the building. + Provide and install one 5-port PoE switch in the Maintenance Office. + Provide and install one Wi-Fi antenna on the exterior of the building pointing towards the Borough office building antenna. • Provide and install one cat 6 cable to each camera and to the Wi-Fi antenna. Cabling will be terminated via RJ45 connector and will be installed back to the PoE switch located in the Maintenance Office. • Provide and install J-hooks to properly support cabling. + Properly seal all exterior penetrations. • Properly test and label cabling upon completion. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 7 • Mast for the antenna will be provided and installed by others. 2. Borough Office Building • Provide and install one 2MP bullet camera on the exterior, focusing on the front entrance. • Provide and install one 4MP bullet camera on the exterior, focusing on the back entrance and yard area. • Provide and install one 2MP dome camera in the meeting room. • Provide and install one 12U wall mount lockable cabinet in the rear spare office. • Provide and install one 5-port PoE switch in the wall mount cabinet. • Provide and install one NVR in the wall mount cabinet. • Provide and install one Wi-Fi antenna on the exterior of the building pointing towards the Maintenance building antenna. Provide and install one cat 6 cable to the camera and to the Wi-Fi antenna. Cabiling will be terminated via RJ45 connector and will be installed back to the PoE switch/NVR located in the rear spare office. • Provide and install J-hooks to properly support cabling. • Properly seal all exterior penetrations. • Properly test and label cabling upon completion. • Mast for the antenna will be provided and installed by others. b. The proposal called for the Borough workers to complete the installation of the masts for the antennas. 32. ADT is a security company that provides alarm systems, security cameras, and access control units. 33. While working and actively communicating with NCI, Zetwick contacted ADT to request a quote for security cameras. a. This call led to an in -person meeting on April 16, 2024, to have an ADT representative complete a site visit and develop a quote. 34. ADT representative Trevor Mackenzie ("Mackenzie") completed the site visit at the Borough on April 16, 2024, with Zetwick and Neely. 35. Mackenzie utilized an iPad to build a quote and review it on -site with Zetwick and Neely. 36. All of ADT's quotes include a monthly fee to cover the warranty on all the equipment. a. ADT's quote for the Borough included a 20% discount on the monthly fee. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 8 37. ADT's quote provided separate plans for the maintenance building and the Borough building. a. ADT quoted $2,972.60 for the installation fee at the maintenance building with a monthly fee of $92,99. b. ADT quoted $1,526.40 for the installation fee at the Borough building with a monthly fee of $57.54. C. The total installation cost was $4,399.00 with an additional monthly payment due in the amount of $150.53. 1. These numbers included the 20% discount that was provided by Mackenzie. 38. At the April 16, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick informed the public about the work session with NO to discuss the cameras and that she contacted ADT for a quote. a. The ADT quote was presented at the meeting as a comparison to the NCI quote. 39. During the meeting, Neely was questioned by the Borough Mayor, Jason Campogiani, about his relation to NCI. a. Neely responded, "it is my son." b. Neely stated that there is a need for cameras because it is a dangerous time. 40. At the April 16, 2024, meeting, a motion was made by Zetwick and seconded by Council Member Steve Falconi to have NCI install cameras with a material and labor cost of $5,646. a. A roll call vote was conducted which carried 4-0, with one Council Member being absent from the meeting. 41. Neely voted in favor of NCI installing the camera system. 42. A fourth revision of the proposal was dated April 30, 2024. a. This revision identified the same scope of work as the third revision, but with the addition of labor cost for NCI to install the masts for the antennas. 1. Borough employees were unable to perform the service associated with installing the masts and antennas. b. Zetwick had contacted NCI for another quote to include the additional cost of installation. C. The proposal totaled $6,777 which included the original project total of $5,646 plus the cost of additional labor of $1,131. Neely, 24-01 l3-C Page 9 43. At the June 11, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick explained that the contract previously approved between NCI and the Borough did not include the installation of the antennas for the camera system, a. A motion was made by Tom Lockwood and seconded by Zetwick to pay NCI approximately $1,000 to install the antennas for the cameras. 1. The vote passed "all in favor." 2. Neely was present at the June 11, 2024, meeting. b. The additional cost was outlined in the proposal dated April 30, 2024. 44, The Borough paid NCI a total of $6,777 through two separate payments. a. Check number 8804 was made out to NCI from the Borough's general fund for the amount of $2,823.00 on May 2, 2024. 1. The check was listed on the bill list for the May 14, 2024, Council meeting. aa. Neely was present and voted in favor of approving the bill list on which check number 9804 was listed. b. Check number 8830 was made out to NCI from the Borough's general fiend for the amount of $3,954.00 on July 9, 2024. The check was listed on the bill list for the July 9, 2024, Council meeting. aa. Neely was present, seconded the motion to approve the bills and voted in favor of approving the bill list on which check number 8830 was listed. 45. C. Neely/NCI did not provide the Borough with any discounts on any of the proposals that were submitted. a. C. Neely's quote of $5,646 that Council voted to approve included the estimated cost of materials, labor, and a 20% profit for NCI. 1. The anticipated profit for the original quote approved was approximately $1,129.20. b. The cost was then increased to $6,777 after the Borough had to pay NCI labor costs for the installation of the antennas. C. Neely did not adjust the profit margin when the additional costs were added. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 10 46. C. Neely estimated a total of 25 hours of labor for his technicians on the quote originally approved for the Borough. a. The technicians ultimately worked 42 hours on the Borough project. 1. The additional labor hours resulted in an approximate additional cost of $1,737.23 that C. Neely did not estimate for when developing his original proposals. b. C. Neely did not update or charge the Borough for the additional labor costs. 47. Neely, in his capacity as a Member of Council, took action to award a contract to NCI, a business with which his son is associated, by contacting C. Neely, voting on the motion to approve the quote with NCI, voting to approve the additional $1,131 to NCI, and voting to approve both bill lists which identified the payments to NCI, resulting in C. Neely's company realizing a private pecuniary benefit of $1,129.20 from the work completed at the Borough. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO NEELY'S FILING OF DEFICIENT STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2023 AND 2024. 48. Statement of Financial Interests ("SFI") filing requirements for public officials and public employees are mandated by Section 1104 of the Ethics Act. a. Section 1104(a) requires that SFIs be filed by May 1 annually. 49. SFI disclosure requirements for public officials and public employees are mandated by Section 1105 of the Ethics Act. a. SFIs must be filed on a form prescribed by the Commission. SFI forms prescribed by the Commission for the past five calendar years have specified, in part, the following at the bottom in bold print: "THIS FORM IS CONSIDERED DEFICIENT IF ANY BLOCK ABOVE IS NOT COMPLETED. MAKE A COPY FOR YOUR RECORDS" b. Individuals signing SFIs do so under oath or equivalent affirmation subject to the penalties prescribed by 18 Pa.C.S. § 4904 (unsworn falsification to authorities) and 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(b) (financial interests statement violation). 50. Neely was required to file SFIs for calendar years 2023 and 2024 in his capacity as a Member of Borough Council. a. Neely has served as a Borough Council Member from January 2024 through the present. Neely, 24-0113-C Page i I 51. Neely had SFIs on file with the Borough for calendar years 2023 and 2024. a. Neely's SFIs were obtained from the Borough on August 7, 2025. 52. Neely filed SFIs with the Borough for calendar years 2023 and 2024 in his capacity as a Member of Borough Council as shown below: Calendar Year Submission Date 2023 January 9, 2024 2024 January 7, 2025 53. Neely failed to complete and/or disclose required information on his 2023 and 2024 calendar year SFIs in his capacity as a Member of Borough Council. 54. Neely failed to disclose an address on his SFI for calendar year 2023. 55. Neely failed to include the following required information on his SFI for calendar year 2024: a. Neely failed to disclose a complete address. b. Neely failed to disclose the governmental body in which he was a public official. C. Neely incorrectly identified the calendar year as 2025 instead of 2024. d. Neely failed to disclose whether he had any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth. e. Neely failed to disclose any creditor to which he owed in excess of $6,500. f. Neely failed to disclose the name and address of the source and the amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more. g. Neely failed to disclose the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650. h. Neely failed to disclose whether he held any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity. i. Neely failed to disclose whether he had any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. j. Neely failed to disclose the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 12 III. DISCUSSION: As a Member of Council for Lewis Rim Borough ("Borough"), McKean County, Pennsylvania, from January 2, 2024, through the present, Scott Neely ("Neely") has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et an. The allegations in this matter are that Neely violated Sections 1103(a), 1105(a), and I I05(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10) of the Ethics Act: (1) When he lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough to Neely Communications, Inc., resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to Neely Communications, Inc., a business with which his son is associated; (2) When he filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address; and (3) When he filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2024 when he failed to include the following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more; the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. 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: § 1103. Restricted activities (a) Conflict of interest. No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a). The following terms relevant to Section 1103(a) are defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 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 Neely, 24-0113-C Page 13 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. The term 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 business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. "Authority of office or employment." The actual power provided by law, the exercise of which is necessary to the performance of duties and responsibilities unique to a particular "Immediate family." A parent, spouse, child, brother or sister. "Business." Any corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, firm, enterprise, franchise, association, organization, self-employed individual, holding company, joint stock company, receivership, trust or any legal entity organized for profit. "Business with which he is associated." Any business in which the person or a member of the person's immediate family is a director, officer, owner, employee or has a financial interest. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act's definition of the term "conflict" or "conflict of interest," 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee is prohibited 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. A child is a member of "immediate family" as the Ethics Act defines that term. A corporation is a business, and a business of which an immediate family member is an owner or officer is a business with which the immediate family member is associated pursuant to the terms of the Ethics Act set forth above. Section 1105(a) of the Ethics Act provides that the SFI shall be filed on the form prescribed by this Commission; that all information requested on the form shall be provided to the best of the knowledge, information and belief of the filer; and that the form shall be signed under oath or equivalent affirmation. Section 1105(b) of the Ethics Act and its subsections detail the financial disclosure that a person required to file the SFI form must provide. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 14 Section 1105(b)(1) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI his name, address, and public position. Section 1105(b)(3) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any direct or indirect interest in any real estate which was sold or leased to 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 or any of its agencies or political subdivisions. Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(4) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in excess of $6,500 and the interest rate thereon. Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(6) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of the source and the amount of any gift or gifts valued in the aggregate at $250 or more and the circumstances of each gift. Subject to certain statutory exceptions, Section 1105(b)(7) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI the name and address of the source and the amount of any payment for or reimbursement of actual expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality received in connection with public office or employment where such actual expenses exceed $650 in an aggregate amount per year. Section 1105(b)(8) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any office, directorship or employment in any business entity. Section 1105(b)(9) of the Ethics Act requires the filer to disclose on the SFI any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. Section 1105(b)(10) of the Ethics Act requires the frier to disclose on the SFI any financial interest in a business with which he is or has been associated in the preceding calendar year which has been transferred to a member of his immediate family. The term "financial interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as "[a]ny financial interest in a legal entity engaged in business for profit which comprises more than 5% of the equity of the business or more than 5% of the assets of the economic interest in indebtedness." 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. As noted above, the parties submitted a Stipulation of Findings with their Consent Agreement. The Findings of this Commission set forth above are derived from the parties' Stipulation of Findings. We sliall now summarize the relevant facts in this matter. Neely has served as a Member of Borough Council ("Council") since January 2, 2024. The Borough is governed by a five -Member Council and a Mayor who participates at Council meetings but does not have voting privileges. Quotes for Borough projects are provided to each Council Member to review at the time of the appropriate meeting. Multiple quotes are generally obtained and provided to Council for comparison purposes. Any Council Member has the ability to request quotes from various businesses. Neely, 24-0113-C Page 15 Chad Neely ("Neely") is Neely's son. Neely Communications Inc. ("NCI") is owned and operated by C. Neely and his wife, Jennifer Neely ("J. Neely"), who are the Vice President and President of NCI, respectively. NCI's services include the installation of Wi-Fi based and wired security systems. NCI generally attempts to get a 20% profit from each of its jobs. C. Neely is responsible for estimating and overseeing projects, and he calculates and puts a 20% profit into each NCI proposal. The Borough buildings did not have a professional security system in place prior to January 2024. Council began discussing the possibility of obtaining a security system in approximately February 2024. The idea of a security system for the Borough buildings originated with Council Vice President Jenna Zetwick ("Zetwick"). At the February 13, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick discussed the difference between wireless and wired cameras and expressed that she would have quotes the following month. After Neely contacted C. Neely to inquire if NCI would be interested in offering its security services to the Borough, C. Neely scheduled a walktbrough of the Borough - owned properties with Neely to assess system needs and generate an estimate. The walkthrough occurred on or prior to February 23, 2024, and was completed by Neely, C. Neely, and J. Neely. On February 23, 2024, C. Neely emailed Zetwick a proposal totaling $10,573 that included work for the Borough's main maintenance building, small maintenance building, and office building and adding card readers on one of the doors at each of the three buildings. After Zetwick asked C. Neely if there was a way that NCI could make the proposal more affordable for the Borough, C. Neely submitted a revised proposal dated February 27, 2024, totaling $8,526, that did not include labor for the installation of antennas for the camera system. Borough employees rather than NCI would install the antennas. After Zetwick followed up by asking if C. Neely could send a "bare minimum" quote, C. Neely sent a second revised proposal on March 1, 2024, that identified one option for a scope of work on the main maintenance building and three options for a scope of work on the office building. On March 26, 2024, Council held a work session to discuss cameras for the Borough's buildings. Only Neely, Zetwick, and Council President Jim Coldren were present at the work session. J. Neely participated in the work session by phone. Zetwick subsequently asked C. Neely to send her a proposal based upon the discussion that occurred at the work session. On April 12, 2024, C. Neely sent Zetwick a third revised proposal, totaling $5,646, that identified work to be completed at the main maintenance building and the office building. The third revised proposal called for the Borough workers to complete the installation of the masts for the antennas. At the April 16, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick informed the public about the work session with NCI to discuss the cameras and that she had contacted ADT, a security company that provides alarm systems and security cameras, for a quote. The ADT quote was presented at the meeting as a comparison to the NCI quote. When Neely was questioned by Borough Mayor Jason Campogiani about Neely's relationship to NCI, Neely responded, "It is my son." When a motion was made to have NCI install cameras at the cost of $5,646, Neely participated in a 4-0 vote of Council that approved the motion. After Borough employees were unable to install the masts for the antennas, Zetwick contacted NCI for a quote that included the performance of that work. NCI subsequently prepared Neely, 24.0113-C Page 16 a fourth revised proposal dated April 30, 2024, that totaled $6,777 and included an additional cost of $1,131 for labor associated with installing the masts for the antennas. At the June 11, 2024, Council meeting, Zetwick explained that the contract previously approved between NCI and the Borough did not include the installation of the masts for the antennas for the camera system. Neely participated in a unanimous vote of Council that approved a motion to pay NCI the additional cost for the installation of the masts for the antennas for the camera system. The Borough subsequently issued two checks to NCI that totaled $6,777. At the Council meetings held on May 14, 2024, and July 9, 2024, Neely voted to approve bill lists that included checks payable to NCI. A profit of $1,129.20 was realized by NCI from the work that it completed for the Borough. As a Council Member, Neely is annually required to file an SFI by May 1 containing information for the prior calendar year. Neely filed a deficient SFI for calendar year 2023 when he failed to list an address. Neely filed a deficient ,SFI for calendar year 2024 when he identified the calendar year as 2025 rather than 2024 and when he failed to disclose: (1) the governmental body for which he served as a public official; (2) any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; (3) any creditor to which he owed in excess of $6,500; (4) the name and address of the source and the amount of any gifts valued at $250 or more; (5) the name and address of the source and the amount of any payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; (6) any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; (7) any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and (8) the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. 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 as follows: 3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the above allegations: That a violation of Section 1103 (a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Neely lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough building to Neely Communications, Inc., resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to Neely Communications, Inc., a business with which his son is associated; b. That a violation of Section 1105(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(a), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address; and Neely, 24-0113-C Page 17 C. That a violation of Sections 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3),(4), (6), (7), (8), (9), and (10) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), (6), (7), (8), (9), and (10), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2024 when he failed to include the following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more; the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. 4. Neely agrees to make payment in the amount of $500 in settlement of this matter payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. a. This amount reflects the civil penalty due for the deficient ,Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2023 and 2024. b. There is no financial penalty due for the violation of Section 1103(a), as the pecuniary benefit was realized by a business with which Neely's immediate family member is associated. 5. To the extent Neely has not already done so, Neely agrees to file complete and accurate amended Statements of Financial Interests with Lewis Run Borough, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for calendar years 2023 and 2024 within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 6. Neely agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from Lewis Run Borough representing a firll or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. 7. The Investigative Division will recommend that the State Ethics Commission take no further action in this matter and make no specific recommendations to any law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter. Such, however, does not prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate enforcement actions in the event of Neely's failure to Neely, 24-0113-C Page 18 comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to review this matter further. a. Neely has been advised that as a matter of course, all orders from the Commission are provided to the Attorney General, albeit without any specific recommendations pursuant to Paragraph 7 above. b. Neely has been advised that all orders become public records and may be acted upon by law enforcement as they deem appropriate. C. The non -referral language contained in this paragraph is considered an essential part of the negotiated Consent Agreement. Consent Agreement, at 1-3. In considering the Consent Agreement, we accept the recommendation of the parties for a finding that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in this matter. NCI is a business with which Neely's son, C. Neely, is associated in his capacity as an owner and an officer (Vice President) of NCI. Neely used the authority of his office as a Council Member in matters pertaining to the installation of a security system for Borough -owned buildings when he: (1) contacted C. Neely to inquire if NCI would be interested in offering its security services to the Borough; (2) completed a walkthrough of the Borough -owned properties with C. Neely and J. Neely for the purpose of assessing system needs; (3) participated in a work session held by Council to discuss cameras for the Borough -owned buildings; (4) participated in a unanimous vote of Council that approved a motion to have NCI install cameras at the cost of $5,646; (5) participated in a unanimous vote of Council that approved a motion to pay NCI an additional $1,131 for the installation of masts for the antennas for the camera system; and (6) voted to approve bill lists that included checks payable to NCI. The parties have stipulated that NCI realized a private pecuniary benefit consisting of a profit totaling $1,12990 from the work that NCI completed for the Borough. With each element of a conflict of interest established, we hold that a violation of Section I I03(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § I I03(a), occurred when Neely lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough building to NCI, resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to NCI, a business with which his son is associated. Turning to the allegations regarding Neely's SFIs, we agree with the parties, and we hold, that: (1) A violation of Section 1105(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(a), occurred when Neely filed a deficient SFI for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address; and (2) A violation of Sections 1105(a) and I I05(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10), occurred when Neely filed a deficient SFI for calendar year 2024 when lie failed to include the Neely, 24-0113-C Page 19 following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or . more; the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transpotlation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. As part of the Consent Agreement, Neely has agreed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for his SFI violations, with such payment to be forwarded to this Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. J Neely has further agreed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. To the extent he has not already done so, Neely has agreed to file complete and accurate amended SFIs for calendar years 2023 and 2024 with the Borough, through this Commission, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth a proper disposition of this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis and the totality of the facts and circumstances. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: I. As a Member of Council for Lewis Run Borough ("Borough"), McKean County, Pennsylvania, from January 2, 2024, through the present, Scott Neely ("Neely") has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et sec . 2. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Neely lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough building to Neely Communications, Inc., resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to Neely Communications, Inc., a business with which his son is associated. 3. A violation of Section 1105(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(a), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address, 4. A violation of Sections 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2024 when he failed to include the following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which The Commission does not have the authority to seek restitution due to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Sivick v, State Ethics Commission, 662 Pa. 283, 238 A.3d 1250 (2020), which prohibits the Commission from seeking the imposition of restitution when there is no private pecuniary benefit directly to a public official or public employee, Neely, 24-0113-C Page 20 he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more; the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. In Re: Scott Neely, File Docket: 24-0113-C Respondent Date Decided: 4/16/26 Date Mailed: 4/23/26 ORDER NO.1854 1. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred when Scott Neely ("Neely"), as a Member of Council for Lewis Run Borough ("Borough"), McKean County, Pennsylvania, lobbied for and/or voted to award a contract to install security cameras at the Borough building to Neely Communications, Inc., resulting in a private pecuniary benefit to Neely Communications, Inc., a business with which his son is associated. 2. A violation of Section 1105(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105(a), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2023 by failing to include his address. 3. A violation of Sections 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10) ofthe Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(a) and 1105(b)(1), (3), (4), and (6)-(10), occurred when Neely filed a deficient Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2024 when he failed to include the following information: his address; his governmental body; the correct year for which he was filing; any direct or indirect interest in any real estate sold or leased to the Commonwealth; the name and address of the source and amount of any gift(s) valued at $250 or more; the name and address of the source and the amount of payment of expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality valued at more than $650; any office, directorship, or employment in any business entity; any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit; and the identity of any financial interest in a business transferred to an immediate family member. 4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Neely is directed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30") day after the mailing date of this Order. Neely is directed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. 6. To the extent he has not already done so, Neely is directed to file complete and accurate amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2023 and 2024 with the Borough, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30"') day after the mailing date of this Order. N, eely, 24-4113-C Page 22 7. Compliance with paragraphs 4, 5, and b of this Order will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. a. Non-compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, x1(///// ---,\ _­ ichael A. Schwartz, Chair