HomeMy WebLinkAbout1374 BovardIn Re: Bruce Bovard,
File Docket:
X -ref:
Date Decided:
Date Mailed:
Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair
John J. Bolger, Vice Chair
Donald M. McCurdy
Raquel K. Bergen
Nicholas A. Colafella
04 -020
Order No. 1374
9/12/05
9/21/05
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 allegations. 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. 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Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter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.
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
Bruce Bovard, a public official /public employee, in his capacity as a Superintendent
of the Canan - McMillan School District, Washington County, violated Section 1103(a)
provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998), 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) when he used the
authority of his office for a private pecuniary gain, including but not limited to purchasing
televisions for himself from a school district vendor in order to obtain discount prices and
avoid paying state sales tax; when he obtained discounted services from a school district
vendor; and when he directed the use of school district employees to perform personal
work for him.
II. FINDINGS:
1. Bruce Bovard served as the Superintendent of the Canon - McMillan School District
from 1993 through June 23, 2003.
2. ERDI, Education Research Development Institute, Inc., located in Grand Isle
Nebraska, provides consulting services to businesses that provide products or
services to the education community.
3. The ERDI mission statement states, in part:
"...to assist quality companies in more effectively meeting the needs of the K -12
education market by providing these companies with specific and productive
interaction with a hand picked panel comprised of the finest leaders in American K-
12 education"
4. ERDI holds conferences twice a year, in February and during the summer months.
a. No products or services are sold at the conferences.
5. ERDI hires school superintendents from across the country as consultants.
a. Consultants are paid $2,000.00 per conference attended.
1. An additional $100.00 is paid to the superintendent who chairs a
panel.
b. Those expenses incurred by the panelists that are not paid directly by the
company, are reimbursed by ERDI.
6. Bovard began serving as a consultant with ERDI at the beginning of 2000.
a. Bovard participated in all of the conferences held in 2000, 2001, and 2002.
b. Fees paid to Bovard during the years 2000 through 2002 totaled $12,500.00.
7 As a consultant to ERDI, Bovard participated, along with four other school
superintendents, on panels that provided feedback to member companies.
a. The superintendents serve on five three -hour panels during the four days of
the conference.
b. ERDI discourages Superintendents serving as panelists from accepting gifts
from companies participating in ERDI.
8. Generally, a presenting company would provide an ERDI panel with an overview of
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 3
the company, a list of questions on the product or services the company was
presenting, and the panel would respond with feedback on the questions.
a. Presentations may consist of a new product; an adjustment in a product; or
an existing product that isn't working.
b. Presentations are made by division level company executives, not sales
representatives.
9. In February 2001 as an ERDI consultant, Bovard participated on a panel regarding
an entity identified as Safari Technologies.
a. Safari's presenter was Tim Beekman.
10. Safari Technologies, Inc. (Safari) produces educational video networking solutions.
a. Safari works with consultant and architectural firms to address long -range
educational planning and project management for new facilities /sites. Safari
provides an on -line resource for facility planning to enable the planners to
obtain a free quotation for its IP video networking system.
b. Safari is a manufacturer and third party vendor for audio video systems that
deliver education material in the school environment.
11. Safari Technologies utilizes various audiovisual, multimedia and presentation
products to compliment the Safari System, and provides name brand equipment to
its customers.
a. Equipment used in conjunction with the Safari System includes: DVD
Players; VCR's; Video Projectors; Televisions and Monitors; projection
screens; camcorders; visual presenters, cables and interface products;
classroom and audiovisual furniture; printers; scanners; etc.
b. Safari participates in the Pennsylvania Educational Purchasing Program
(PEPPM); as well as similar programs with other States.
c. Name brand equipment available through Safari includes, among other
vendors, Sony and JVC.
d. Safari is a manufacturer and third -party vendor for audio /video systems,
which includes individual third party sales of television monitors, plasma
screens, speakers and related equipment.
12. In or about 1999 the Canon - McMillan School District began planning for the
renovation of the district high school.
a. The architectural firm of Burt Hill Kosar Rittleman Associates "Burt Hill ", was
retained by the school board to design the new high school.
b. The renovation project included the upgrade and installation of the district's
technology system.
13. Burt Hill was to provide the wiring from the Data source to the end source
(classroom, etc.), and to provide the racks for the equipment.
a. The district was responsible for providing the headend equipment, including
the hubs and the switches.
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 4
b. On public school projects, Burt Hill does not typically provide the head end
equipment for a project.
14. Burt Hill played no role in the technology portion of the high school renovation
project.
a. Technology was not bid as a separate prime contract, but was a part of the
work of the Electrical Prime Contractor (Vern's Electric).
b. Burt Hill estimated $2.50 /s.f. for the technology scope.
1. The scope did not include head end equipment.
15. The technology aspect of the renovations was the only area of the project not
competitively bid.
16. Bovard, in his capacity as school district superintendent, had the ultimate
responsibilities for the technology upgrades for the high school renovation project.
17. Bovard discussed the district's technology project with Timothy Beekman, President
of Safari Technologies, Network Division sometime between February 2001 and or
about June 2001.
18. Safari Technologies submitted a quote dated November 12, 2001 to the Canon
McMillan School District.
a. The quote was for (30) Sony 32" color television monitors at total cost of
$20,035.00.
19. A Canon - McMillan purchase order dated November 26, 2001 was issued to Safari
in the amount of $20,035.00.
a. The P.O. was for the purchase of 30 Sony KV32566 Color T.V.'s w/s inputs.
b. The school district was invoiced by Safari on February 27, 2002.
20. All proposals /quotes submitted by Safari required the review and approval of
Bovard.
a. All purchase orders issued by the school district were done at Bovard's
direction.
21. In March 2002, Tim Beekman submitted a Safari Technologies Proposal for a
Networked Video Distribution System to the Canon - McMillan School District, which
provided as follows:
The immediate plan is to install a networked video distribution system at Canon -
McMillan. Installing a SAFARI networked video distribution system enables Canon -
McMillan to provide uniform opportunities to all students and staff. In addition, it
lays the groundwork for the Canon - McMillan to easily share resources to future
buildings and sites that wish to participate with the district in a multitude of
educational endeavors."
In the Safari Proposal the following reference is noted:
"Leaders at Canon - McMillan seek a stable, seamless, robust interactive learning
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 5
technology system that meets the needs of staff members and students. Canon -
McMillan also seeks to implement a learning technology system that will enhance
good, successful teaching practices already utilized by staff member. Canon -
McMillan seeks technology that will enhance -not interrupt -the learning process for
staff and students ".
a. Beekman's cost estimates for the technology system totaled $199,552.10.
22. On March 28, 2002 Beekman faxed to Bovard Safari's scope of work and pricing for
installing a high -end video network system for 76 classrooms at the high school.
a. Beekman's pricing totaled $265,563.88 which included $68,450 in options.
23. On or about April 3, 2002 Bovard authorized a Canon - McMillan School District
purchase order to Safari Technologies in the amount of $199,552.10 for the
purchase of the high -end video network system.
24. The Canon - McMillan School Board did not vote to approve the installation of the
Safari system in the district high school.
a. No other technology system proposals were obtained.
b. The technology contract was not publicly advertised and bid.
c. The decision to make the $199,552.10 system purchase from Safari was
ultimately approved by Bovard.
25. On June 11, 2002, a Canon - McMillan purchase order was issued to Safari in the
amount of $35,682.00.
a.
b.
The purchase order authorized the purchase of (57) JVC 32" television
monitors w /Safari DMC cable package.
The purchase order was authorized by Bovard.
26. In or about May or June 2002 Bovard discussed with Beekman the personal
purchase of a plasma television system from Safari.
b. Bovard and Beekman discussed prices.
27. In or around June 2002, Bovard purchased a Cornea 42 inch Plasma Television
and Surround Sound System from Safari Technologies at a discounted price.
a. The discounted price was offered because of Bovard's position with the
school district.
b. Bovard placed the order through Tim Beekman.
28. Safari Technologies issued Invoice #0301071, to Bovard on or about 7/30/02, for
AV equipment - Plasma system - including installation and all hardware.
a. The notation on the invoice confirmed that Tim Beekman was to deliver and
install the system.
1. Beekman's delivery of the equipment saved Bovard freight or delivery
charges.
DESCRIPTION
MODEL #
RETAIL
PRICE
JVC DVD Player
XV -FA900
$
JVC CD Player
XL- R5010BK
349.95
JVC Audio/Video Control Receiver
RX- 9010VBK
550.00
JVC CD Player
XL-
550.00
n/a
R5010BK*
JVC VHS Player
HR -S3901
199.95
Bose Acoustimass 6 Home
Series II **
599.99
Cinema Speaker System
Cornea Plasma 42" Television
MP4200
3,642.99
Wall Mount Bracket for television
n/a
148.00
Sub -Total
$6,040.8
8
Freight
75.00
Installation
373.00
TOTAL
$6,488.8
8
Description
Model#
JVC DVD Player
XV -FA900
JVC Audio/Video Control Receiver
RX- 9010VBK
JVC CD Player
XL- R5010BK
JVC VHS Player
HR -53901
Bose Acoustimass 6 Home
Cinema Speaker System
Series 11
Cornea Plasma 42" Television
MP4200
Wall Mount Bracket for television
n/a
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 6
b. The invoice lists the cost as $4,801.00
29. Bovard received the following items from Safari:
30. Tim Beekman delivered the equipment.
31. Bovard issued Safari Technologies a personal check dated 8/30/02, in the amount
of $4,801.00.
32. The actual cost for a system as purchased by Bovard totaled at least $6,488.88 as
listed below:
a. Prices listed are Manufacturers Suggested Retail Price.
33. Bovard received a discount of at least $1,687.88 on the equipment he purchased
through Safari Technologies.
a. Total retail cost: $6,488.88
Amount paid by Bovard: $4,801.00
Balance: $1,687.88
34. Subsequent to Bovard's discussions with Beekman and his receipt of the
CHECK #
CHECK
DATE
CHECK
AMOUNT
INVOICE
REFERENCE
10869
03/07/02
$20,035.0
29083
0
10953
07/26/02
35, 682.00
30821*
11539
12/20/02
58, 886.92
32743,
32744, 32863
11107
01/28/03
186, 587.9
33063,
1
33173,
33312,
33313,
33314,
33398,
33399, 33400
11135
02/25/03
76,142.84
033311
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 7
discounted television system from Safari, the following invoices were submitted by
Safari to the Canon - McMillan School District:
C -M
Date Invoice No. P.O. Amount
2/27/02 29083 1247 $20,035.00
7/11/02 30821 1803 $35,682.00
11/22/02 32743 1641 $43,990.56
11/22/02 32744 1641 $12,821.36
11/27/02 32863 1144 $ 2,075.00
12/12/02 33063 1144 $ 2,860.00
12/17/02 33173 1144 $87,620.50
12/23/02 33311 1641 $76,142.84
12/23/02 33312 1641 $19,035.71
12/23/02 33313 1641 $19,500.00
12/23/02 33314 1144 $27,489.25
12/30/02 33398 1641 $25,690.47
12/30/02 33399 1641 $ 54.23
12/30/02 33400 1641 $ 4,337.75
$377,334.67
35. Bovard signed the invoices authorizing that the payments to Safari Technologies,
totaling $386,704.14, be presented to the Board for approval, which included the
following district payments:
*Invoice included equipment for the high school and the
5 -6 Center projects.
*This was prior to the Board's decision to eliminate the
Safari equipment from the 5 -6 Centers.
The following findings relate to district contractors performing work at Bovard's
residence.
36. In or around 1996, Bovard built and occupied a house on 16.783 acres in North
Strabane Township, Washington County, Pennsylvania, where he resided until
2003.
37. The Canon - McMillan School Board awarded the primary bids for the South Central
Elementary School construction project at the February 22, 2000, Board Meeting,
38. While the South Central Elementary Project was ongoing, Bovard utilized district
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 8
equipment to bargain for electrical work at his home.
39. Bovard attended the weekly construction meetings along with representatives of the
contractors, the construction manager, architect, and District Director of Support
Services Lee Schafer.
40. At a weekly construction meeting in the spring of 2000, the disposition of various
equipment and related materials was discussed.
a. The equipment and materials that the district planned to keep were
identified.
b. All remaining equipment and /or materials were to be disposed of by making
available to the public or thrown away.
c. Items identified for disposal were usually thrown away.
d. Items to be discarded or trashed were made available to anyone wanting the
items.
41. Bellesario Electric, a commercial electrical contractor, was awarded the electrical
contract on the South Central Elementary project with a bid of $692,237.00.
a. Thomas McGowan was the Foreman /Field Superintendent for Bellesario
Electric on the project.
42. At a weekly construction meeting, while discussing the disposition of equipment and
supplies Thomas McGowan expressed an interest in a gas powered generator if the
item was to be discarded by the district.
a. Bellesario Electric employees were permitted to obtain items that were
designated to be thrown away.
b. Bovard informed McGowan that he wanted to talk to McGowan about the gas
powered generator after the meeting.
43. Bovard told McGowan he would give him the generator if McGowan would do some
electrical work at his home.
44. During the spring of 2000 McGowan spent approximately eighteen hours at
Bovard's house performing electrical work.
a. McGowan worked two nights, one hour each night, and eight hours on a
Saturday.
b. A friend of McGowan's worked with him for the eight hours on Saturday.
45. Bovard did not pay McGowan or his friend for the work they performed at his house.
a. The only `payment' McGowan received was the generator.
b. The generator was a 1500 watt, 12 volt, gas powered generator that had a
transfer switch and would have required a plumber to took [sic] up to a gas
line.
1. The generator was approximately 25 years old.
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 9
2. The generator was operational.
46. McGowan, who provides electrical services independently of his position with
Bellario, estimated the value of his service to Bovard at $200.00.
47. R.A. Glancy & Sons was awarded the bid as General Contractor on the high school
renovation project at the Board meeting in October 2000.
a. Company Project Manager Gary Guzak was assigned to the project.
48. Bovard's involvement in the high school renovation project included regularly
attending construction meetings with the project contractors.
49. In the fall of 2001, Bovard approached Gary Guzak and requested an estimate on
the installation of a concrete pad on his property.
a. Guzak subsequently provided Bovard with a price.
50. Approximately two weeks after Guzak met with Bovard, Guzak directed Glancy
Foreman Kevin Branthoover and at least two other employees to install the
concrete pad at Bovard's residence.
a. On the first day, Branthoover constructed the wood frame, with the help of
two other Glancy Employees.
b. On the second visit to Bovard's two Glancy employees, including
Branthoover mixed and poured the concrete.
1. At Guzak's direction, the surface of the pad was left rough, not
"finished"
c. The installation of the pad took two days.
d. The work was performed during normal business hours.
51. The dimensions of the concrete pad R.A. Glancy & Sons installed on Bovard's
property are as follows:
Thickness: 4 inches
Overall size: 39 feet by 28 feet
Apron size: 9 feet by 26 inches.
Total: 1110 square feet of concrete
52. Bovard issued personal check #2003, dated 11/27/01, in the amount of $2,051.00
to R. A. Glancy & Sons for the installation of the concrete pad.
53. Estimates from other contractors indicate that the price charged by Guzak was
within the approximate range of estimates provided by other contractors.
54. Any discount provided to Bovard for the concrete work was de minimis in nature.
The following findings relate to district employees performing work for Bovard on
district time.
55. Lee Schafer has been employed by the Canon - McMillan School District as the
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 10
Director of Support Services since 1992.
a. Schafer reported directly to Bovard as the Superintendent.
b. Schafer is responsible for transportation, maintenance (including custodial
services and buildings and grounds) and security for the district.
c. Schafer is a salaried, full year employee.
1. Schafer is permitted to flex his schedule because he is on call
24 hours a day.
2. His regular work hours were Monday through Friday 8:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m.
3. Schafer is not required to keep records of his time, other than
to submit leave slips for the leave time he is afforded through
his employment with the district.
56. During the time period 1996 through May 27, 2003, Bovard utilized Schafer to
perform various personal errands and work for him.
a. Schafer did not feel comfortable refusing the requests because Bovard was
his boss.
1. Schafer usually complied with the requests.
2. Schafer said no to Bovard a few times.
c. Schafer did not accept any compensation for the things he did for Bovard,
and Bovard never offered him any compensation.
d. Schafer initially considered Bovard a friend, and did things for Bovard
because of their friendship.
e. Schafer grew to feel that Bovard was taking advantage of their friendship,
but found it difficult to say no to Bovard because of the employee /employer
relationship.
57. The first request Bovard made of Schafer was to help him install a mower deck on
his tractor.
a. Bovard asked for Schafer's help because he knew that Schafer was a
certified inspection mechanic.
58. On at least one occasion Bovard brought several pieces of wood to Schafer that he
needed to have cut.
a. Schafer took the wood to a teacher in the high school shop class.
59. On at least one occasion Bovard brought mower blades from his tractor to Schafer
for sharpening.
a. Schafer took the blades to a district employee who provided his personal
sharpening machine for district purposes.
60. In the fall of 2001, Bovard required Schafer's help to replace the underside of a
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 11
driver's seat and install a compact disc player in the trunk of an older model
Mercedes Benz.
61. In the fall of 2001, Bovard requested that Schafer go to his residence and help raise
the barn walls.
a. Schafer helped raise the barn walls and tie them together.
b. Others present included an employee of Glancy and Sons and several
employees of Buddy Gregg.
62. Schafer also assisted Bovard with the electrical wiring for the barn, which occurred
around December of 2001.
a. Schafer hooked up the power to the main breaker.
b. Bovard installed the electrical wiring himself but did not know how to hook up
the mains.
c. The work took not more than one hour to perform.
d. Bovard was present.
63. Schafer did all of the foregoing work during his normal school district working hours.
64. Schafer's rate of pay in 2001 was $35.00 per hour.
65. Bovard assets [sic] that he believed that Schafer was flexing his time at the school
district on the occasions that he assisted in the various projects.
66. Bovard asserts that he did not intend for Schafer to do the projects on district time.
III. DISCUSSION:
At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Bruce Bovard, hereinafter
(Bovard), 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 Bovard as Superintendent of Canon - McMillan School
District, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he purchased a television for
himself from a school district vendor in order to obtain a discount price and avoid paying
state sales tax; when he obtained discounted services from other school district vendors;
and when he directed a school district employee to perform personal work for him.
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 9 of 1989/Act 93 of 1998 as
follows:
Section 2. 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
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 12
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
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.
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.
Bovard served as a Superintendent of the Canon - McMillan School District ( "School
District ") from 1993 through June of 2003. In a private capacity, Bovard has served as a
consultant for the Education Research Development Institute, Inc. ( "ERDI "). The mission
statement for ERDI is to assist companies as to the needs of the K -12 education market
through interaction with a panel comprised of education leaders in the American K -12
educational system. ERDI holds two conferences a ear and hires school superintendents
to act as consultants. ERDI pays the consultants $2,000 per conference plus incurred
expenses which are reimbursed by ERDI if not paid directly by the companies. For the
years 2000 through 2003, Bovard received a total of $12,500 in payments for his services
at the conferences.
At a February 2001 conference, Bovard participated on a panel regarding Safari
Technologies, Inc. ( "Safari "), a manufacturer that develops educational video networking
systems. Safari provides name brand equipment to its customers and utilizes various
audio visual, multi -media and presentation products to complement its systems.
When the School District planned to renovate its high school in 1999, it retained the
architectural firm of Burt Hill Kosar Rittleman Associates ( "Burt Hill ") to design the high
school project. The high school renovation project included an upgrade and installation of
the technology system. Burt Hill did not play a role in the technology portion of the
renovation project that was to be performed by the electrical prime contractor (Vern's
Electric). The technology portion of the renovations was the only aspect of the project that
was not competitively bid. Bovard, as School District Superintendent, had the ultimate
responsibility for the technology upgrades as to the high school renovation project. Bovard
discussed the School District's technology project with the President of Safari between
February and June 2001. Safari then submitted a quote in the amount of $20,035 to the
School District for 30 Sony 32" color television monitors. Since all purchase orders issued
by the School District were done at Bovard's direction, Safari's proposal required his
review and approval.
In March of 2002, Timothy Beekman, the President of Safari, submitted a proposal
for a network video distribution system for the School District at a cost estimate of
$199,552.10. On March 28, 2002, Beekman faxed to Bovard details as to the scope of
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 13
work and installation pricing for a high end video network system for 76 classrooms in the
high school totaling $265,563.88. In April 2002, Bovard authorized the purchase for the
School District of an order from Safari Technologies in the amount of $199,552.10 for the
purchase of the high end video network system. The School District Board did not vote or
approve the installation of the Safari System in the high school. Bovard approved the
system without obtaining any other proposals and without publicly advertising the
technology contract for bid. In June 2002, a School District purchase order was issued to
Safari in the amount of $35,682 for 57 JVC 32" television monitors with a Safari DMC cable
package. That order was also authorized by Bovard.
In May or June of 2002, Bovard had a discussion with Beekman about a purchase
of a plasma television system from Safari for Bovard's personal use. In June, Bovard
purchased a Cornea 42" plasma television and surround sound system from Safari at a
discounted price because of his position with the School District. Safari then invoiced
Bovard in July of 2002 for the plasma TV plus installation and related hardware totaling
$4,801. Beekman delivered the equipment to Bovard who issued a personal check in the
amount of $4,801. Bovard received a discount of at least $1,687.88 on the purchase of the
system from Safari. See, Fact Findings 26 through 33.
Subsequently, after Bovard received the discounted plasma TV system from Safari,
the School District was billed by Safari through a series of invoices totaling $377,334.67.
Bovard signed the invoices authorizing the payments to Safari totaling $386,704.14.
Parenthetically, the difference between the above two figures relates to the School District
Board's decision to eliminate certain Safari equipment from certain centers. See, Fact
Findings 34, 35.
Separate and apart from the above, Bovard utilized District equipment to bargain for
electrical work at his home from another School District vendor. The School District also
awarded contracts for a construction project at an elementary school. During weekly
construction meetings, the disposition of various existing equipment and related materials
was considered by either making the equipment available for the public or for discard.
Bellesario Electric was the commercial electric contractor that was awarded the contract
for the elementary school project at a bid price of $692,237.
At a weekly construction meeting, Thomas McGowan, the Foreman of Bellesario
Electric, expressed an interest in a gas powered generator that was to be discarded by the
School District. Bovard took the opportunity to tell McGowan that he (Bovard) would give
McGowan the generator if McGowan in turn would do electrical work at Bovard's home.
Subsequently, McGowan performed approximately 18 hours, and a friend eight hours, of
electrical work at Bovard's home. Bovard did not make any payments for the work.
McGowan received the gas generator in payment for his services. The generator was an
operational 1500 watt 12 volt gas powered generator that was approximately 25 years old.
McGowan estimated that the value of the electrical services performed for Bovard was
approximately $200.
In another situation, there was a high school renovation project for which R.A.
Clancy & Sons was awarded the bid as the general contractor. In the Fall of 2001, Bovard
contacted the project manager, Gary Guzak, and requested an estimate for the installation
of a concrete pad on Bovard's property. After Bovard received a quote, he directed Guzak
to install the concrete pad. The work was done by the project foreman and two employees.
Bovard then issued his personal check in the amount of $2,051 to R.A. Clancy & Sons for
installation of the concrete pad. The price charged by Guzak is within the range of
estimates for such a project based upon information provided by other contractors.
The last factual scenario concerns School District employees performing work for
Bovard during regular work hours. The School District employs a Director of Support
Services, Lee Schafer, who reports directly to Bovard as a Superintendent. Schafer is
responsible for the transportation, maintenance and security at the School District.
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 14
Schafer is a salaried employee who is able to work on a flex schedule even though he has
regular set hours.
From 1996 through May 2003, Bovard used Schafer to perform various personal
errands and work for him. Although Schafer initially considered Bovard as a friend,
Schafer later believed that Bovard was taking advantage of him. However, Schafer did not
feel comfortable refusing Bovard's request since Bovard was his boss. On one occasion,
Bovard requested Schafer's assistance in installing a mower deck on Bovard's tractor. In
another instance, Bovard brought several pieces of wood to Schafer for cutting to size.
Schafer took the wood to a high school shop class. Further, Bovard brought his mower
blades from his tractor to Schafer for sharpening by using School District equipment.
Bovard also requested Schafer to help him replace an underside of a driver's seat and
install a compact disc player in his Mercedes Benz. In addition, Bovard at one point
requested Schafer to go to Bovard's residence and help raise barn walls. Schafer also
assisted Bovard with electrical wiring in the barn. Schafer did all of the above work during
his normal School District working hours. Bovard asserts that he believes Schafer was
flexing his time at the School District while he assisted Bovard as to various projects.
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:
"3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the
above allegations:
a. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred in relation to Bovard's
purchase of a television for himself from a school district vendor at a
discounted price.
b. A violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when Bovard obtained free
electrical services from a school district vendor in return for a
discarded school district generator.
c. No violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee
Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when Bovard employed a
school district vendor to lay a concrete pad at his house at a
discounted price, as Bovard paid the fair market value for the services
rendered and any discount was de minimis in nature.
d. An unintentional violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when Bovard
used a school district employee to perform personal work for him.
4. Bovard agrees to make payment in the amount of $2,000 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."
In applying the provisions of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the above
allegations, there were uses of authority of office on the part of Bovard. But for the fact
that Bovard was Superintendent of the School District, he would have not been in a
position to obtain a large screen plasma television for himself at a discounted price from a
vendor (Safari) that had a contract with the School District. Bovard signed Safari's
invoices and presented them to the School District Board for approval. Bovard used the
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 15
authority of his position as Superintendent of the School District to obtain the discounted
large screen plasma television and accompanying equipment from Safari that had the
contract with the school district. Such actions were uses of authority of office. See,
Juliante, Order 809. The uses of authority of office by Bovard resulted in a pecuniary
benefit consisting of the plasma television system that he received at a discounted price.
The pecuniary benefit was private because there is no provision in law that allows a
School District Superintendent to use his position to obtain discounted items for personal
use from a school district vendor. Lastly, the private pecuniary benefit inured to Bovard
himself. Accordingly, Bovard violated Section 1103(a) when he purchased a television for
himself from a school district vendor at a discounted price. Sickles, Order 901.
Regarding the electrical services Bovard obtained at his home from a School
District vendor, there were uses of authority of office on the part of Bovard. Bovard
specifically approached the vendor in his capacity as Superintendent and indicated that
the electrical services contractor could obtain a School District electric generator, which
was about to be discarded, in exchange for the contractor providing electrical services at
Bovard's home. Even though the electric generator was designated for discard, Bovard
used the generator as leverage and a quid pro quo for the electrical contractor to provide
services at Bovard's home. The uses of authority of office by Bovard resulted in a private
pecuniary benefit to him consisting of the free electrical services that were performed at his
home. That private pecuniary benefit was received by Bovard himself. Accordingly,
Bovard violated Section 1103(a) when he obtained free electrical services from a School
District vendor in return for a discarded school district operator. Dusenberry, Order 1064.
As to the allegation of the use by a School District vendor to lay a concrete pad at
Bovard's house for a discounted price, the Findings reflect that the price that Bovard paid
the contractor to do such work was in the range of what other contractors would charge for
performing that service. The record further reflects that if there were any discount to
Bovard, it would not have been any more than $200. It would appear that Bovard probably
did not receive any private pecuniary benefit for this service and if there indeed were a
private pecuniary benefit, it would not have been any more than $200 which is considered
de minimis and excludable as a conflict under the Ethics Act. Accordingly, Bovard did not
violate Section 1103(a) when he employed a school district vendor to lay a concrete pad at
his house in that he paid the fair market value for the services rendered and any discount
was de minimis in nature. Robinson, Order 1009.
The last allegation concerns the utilization by Bovard of the School District Director
of Support Services to perform various personal work for Bovard. The Findings reflect that
Bovard requested the Director of Support Services to perform various services for Bovard:
help Bovard install a mower deck on his tractor, arrange to have some wood of Bovard cut
to size, sharpen the mower blades for Bovard's tractor in the School District shop, help
Bovard replace the underside of a driver's seat and install a compact disc player in his
personal vehicle, help raise barn walls on Schafer's property, and assist with electrical
wiring in his barn. All such actions were at the direction of Bovard as Superintendent.
Hence such actions were uses of authority of office by Bovard. The uses of authority of
office by Bovard resulted in private pecuniary benefits to him consisting of the financial
gain that Bovard received by not having to personally pay for such expenditures. The
private pecuniary benefits inured to Bovard individually. Hence, Bovard unintentionally
violated Section 1103(a) when he used a School District employee to perform personal
work for him. Rakowsky, Order 744.
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, Bovard is directed to make
payment in the amount of $2,000 in settlement of this matter. Said amount is to be made
payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to be forwarded to this Commission
within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. Compliance
Bovard, 04 -020
Page 16
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. Bruce Bovard (Bovard), as a Superintendent of the Canan - McMillan School District,
Washington County was a public official subject to the provisions of Act 9 of 1989
as codified by Act 93 of 1998.
2. Bovard violated Section 1103(a) when he purchased a television for himself from a
school district vendor at a discounted price.
3. Bovard violated Section 1103(a) when he obtained free electrical services from a
school district vendor in return for a discarded school district generator.
4. Bovard did not violate Section 1103(a) when he employed a school district vendor
to lay a concrete pad at his house in that he paid the fair market value for the
services rendered and any discount was de minimis in nature.
5. Bovard unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) when he used a school district
employee to perform personal work for him.
In Re: Bruce Bovard
ORDER NO. 1374
File Docket: 04 -020
Date Decided: 9/12/05
Date Mailed: 9/21/05
1 Bruce Bovard, as a Superintendent of the Canan - McMillan School District,
Washington County, violated Section 1103(a) when he purchased a television for
himself from a school district vendor at a discounted price.
2. Bovard violated Section 1103(a) when he obtained free electrical services from a
school district vendor in return for a discarded school district generator.
3. Bovard did not violate Section 1103(a) when he employed a school district vendor
to lay a concrete pad at his house at a discounted price in that he paid the fair
market value for the services rendered and any discount was de minimis in nature.
4. Bovard unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) when he used a school district
employee to perform personal work for him.
5. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Bovard is directed to make payment in
the amount of $2,000 in settlement of this matter payable to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania and to be forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter
a. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no
further action by this Commission.
b. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
Louis W. Fryman, Chair