HomeMy WebLinkAbout1409 PriceIn Re: Gene Price,
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
Nicholas A. Colafella
05 -012
Order No. 1409
10/4/2006
10/20/2006
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Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter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.
Price, 05 -012
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
That Gene Price, a public official /public employee, in his capacity as Sheriff of
Venango County, violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) 65 Pa.C.S.
§ §1103(a); 1105(b)(5) when he used the authority of his office for private pecuniary gain,
including but not limited to, using employees, office equipment, and supplies of the office
of Venango County Sheriff for personal purposes including, but not limited to, his re-
election; and when he failed to disclose all sources of income in excess of $1,300 on
Statements of Financial Interests filed for the 2002 and 2003 calendar years.
II. FINDINGS:
1. E. Eugene (Gene) Price has served as the Venango County Sheriff from January 6,
1986 through the present.
a. Price was initially elected in November 1985 and has been re- elected every
four years thereafter.
b. Price was employed as a full -time Venango County Deputy Sheriff from
October 10, 1978 through January 5, 1986.
2. The Venango County Sheriff's Office is one of several row offices in the Venango
County Courthouse.
a. Individual row officers are responsible for the hiring and firing of employees
in his /her respective office.
1. Price alone holds this responsibility for the Sheriff's Office, although
he may consider input from others in formulating his decision.
3. The Venango County Sheriff's Department currently is capable of employing up to
fourteen full time individuals including Price as Sheriff.
a. The department is budgeted for the employment of eleven full -time law
enforcement officers including Price as Sheriff.
1. One Chief Deputy position exists.
2. One Sergeant position exists.
3. Eight deputy sheriff positions exist.
b. The department is budgeted for the employment of three full -time
administrative support personnel.
1. One Administrative Assistant position exists.
2. Two clerk positions exist.
4. Deputy Sheriffs and two members of the administrative staff of the Sheriff's Office
are union employees.
a. Deputy sheriffs and applicable administrative staff are represented by
Teamsters Local 538.
b. The Sheriff, Chief Deputy, and Administrative Assistant are not union
employees.
Price, 05 -012
Page 3
5. Subjects such as hours of work, breaks, and discipline for Union employees are set
forth, among other subjects, in the Union contract.
a. Regular work shifts for deputy sheriffs total eight hours including a forty -five
minute paid meal period while regular work shifts for clerical employees total
seven hours per day excluding a one -hour unpaid lunch period.
b. Deputy sheriffs are to receive one fifteen minute paid break per day while
the county is to attempt to provide each clerical employee with two fifteen
minute paid breaks per day.
1. Although required via the Union contract, Sheriff's Department
employees did not regularly receive fifteen - minute breaks until
approximately November 2005.
c. The county may discharge any employee.
1. Discharge is not grievable or arbitrable under the terms of the
contract.
6. Non -Union employees do not enjoy the same rights and benefits as those received
by employees covered under the Union Contract.
a. Non -Union employees follow policies and procedures set forth by the county.
7 Section 1620 of the County Code sets forth mandates regarding salaries and
compensation for all county officials and employees and states, in part, the
following, The exercise of such responsibilities by the county commissioners shall
in no way affect the hiring, discharging, and supervising rights and obligations with
respect to such employees as may be vested in the judges or other county officers."
a. Section 1620 provides ultimate discretion to row officers regarding the hiring
and terminating of employees in their respective offices.
b. Price has asserted his ability to hire and fire employees at his discretion to
the extent permitted by law whenever the issue arose.
8. Gene Price has used the office, equipment (including telephones, fax machines,
computers), deputy sheriffs, and other staff of the Venango County Sheriff's
Department to the benefit of his re- election campaigns in 2001 and in conjunction
with the primary election of 2005.
a. Price does not maintain a campaign office or other separate space for
campaigning or re- election purposes.
b. Price has no campaign manager, secretary, treasurer, etc.
c. Price does not utilize a campaign committee to assist him in his re- election
efforts.
d. Price does not utilize paid help to assist with his campaign.
9. Candidates interested in running for public office or re- election must file nominating
petitions with the county's Bureau of Elections.
a. Nominating petitions may be circulated by the candidate or by an individual
Price, 05 -012
Page 4
on behalf of the candidate.
1. The circulator must be of the same political party as the candidate.
b. Nominating petitions must be returned to the candidate for actual filing with
the Bureau of Elections.
10. At least one hundred signatures are required for a candidate to be placed on the
ballot for sheriff regarding the primary election.
a. Individuals signing the nominating petitions are required to be registered
voters and belong to the same political party as the candidate.
11. Nominating petitions must be signed and notarized prior to filing with the Bureau of
Elections.
a. The individual circulating the nominating petition must sign the Affidavit of
Circulator included in the nominating petition and have the affidavit
notarized.
b. The candidate submitting the nominating petition must sign the Candidate's
Affidavit and Loyalty Oath included in the nominating petition and have the
affidavit notarized a second time.
12. Specific dates are established for Pennsylvania elections regarding the first and
last days that nominating petitions may be circulated and filed.
a. In 2001 the first and last days to circulate and file nominating petitions were
February 13, 2001, and March 6, 2001 respectively.
b. In 2005 the first and last days to circulate and file nominating petitions were
February 15, 2005, and March 8, 2005 respectively.
13. Venango County policy prohibits campaigning /electioneering by candidates or their
representatives on county property.
a. Venango County has implemented this policy since at least 1997.
14. Since 1997, at least two notices have been publicly displayed by the county on
different occasions to make employees, candidates, and /or their representatives
aware of the county's mandate regarding campaigning /electioneering as shown
below:
a. "NOTICE
SIGNING OF PETITIONS FOR NOMINATION BY CANDIDATES OR THEIR
REPRESENTATIVES IS PROHIBITED ON ALL COUNTY PREMISES.
HEREBY DIRECTED AND ORDERED THIS 17 DAY OF FEBRUARY,
1997 BY THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Peter M. Winkler; Robert L. Murray; Deborah A. Lutz"
b. "DISTRIBUTION OF CAMPAIGN LITERATURE AND OTHER FORMS OF
ELECTIONEERING IS PROHIBITED ON COUNTY OWNED OR LEASED
PROPERTY*
Venango County Election Board
Price, 05 -012
Page 5
Larry E. Horn
Gary R. Hutchinson
Denise W. Jones
*EXCEPT AT DESIGNATED POLLING PLACES ON ELECTION DAY"
15. Notices dictating county policy regarding the signing of nominating petitions,
distribution of campaign literature, and other forms of electioneering are
conspicuously placed throughout the Venango County Courthouse and the
Courthouse Annex during election years.
a. The Sheriff's Office is located on the first floor of the county courthouse.
16. In the spring of 2001 and 2005, Price utilized sheriff's deputies for re- election
purposes by soliciting the deputies to circulate nominating petitions on his behalf.
a. In 2001 Price solicited Chief Deputy David Morris, Sergeant Robert Martz,
and Deputies James Marshall, James Fox, John Reitz, Keith Wensel, and
Kevin Tarr to circulate nominating petitions.
1. Six of the individuals solicited circulated nominating petitions for Price.
aa. Deputy Fox did not circulate a nominating petition for Price.
b. In 2005 Price solicited Chief Deputy David Morris, Sergeant Kurt Gindhart,
and Deputies Justin O'Neil, William Carbaugh, Frederick Myers, Jeff
Dougherty, Jason Bean and Eric Foy to circulate nominating petitions.
1. Seven of the individuals solicited circulated nominating petitions for
Price.
aa. Bean did not circulate a nominating petition for Price.
bb. Foy was not permitted to circulate a nominating petition in his
position as the Domestic Relations Officer.
17. Morris is paid an annual salary in his position as Chief Deputy.
a. Morris received a salary of $28,297.00 in 2001.
1. Morris' wage was approximately $13.60 per hour in 2001 based on a
forty -hour workweek ($28,297.00 _ 52 weeks _ 40 hours per week =
$13.60).
b. Morris received a salary of $33,123.00 in 2005.
1. Morris' wage was approximately $15.92 per hour in 2005 based on a
forty -hour workweek ($33,123.00 _ 52 weeks _ 40 hours per week =
$15.92).
18. Deputies employed in the Sheriff's Department receive hourly wages based on the
Union contract.
a. In 2001, deputies circulating nominating petitions for Price received hourly
wages as shown below:
Price, 05 -012
Page 6
Employee Rate of Pay
Robert Martz
James Marshall
James Fox
John Reitz
Keith Wensel
Kevin Tarr
10.40 /hr
10.19/hr
9.59/hr
9.59/hr
9.59/hr
9.59/hr
b. In 2005, deputies circulating nominating petitions for Price received hourly
wages as shown below:
Employee Rate of Pay
Kurt Gindhart
Justin O'Neil
William Carbaugh
Frederick Myers
Jeff Dougherty
Jason Bean
Eric Foy
11.20/hr
10.86/hr
11.08/hr
10.75/hr
10.33/hr
10.64/hr
10.86/hr
19. The solicitation of the deputies primarily took place in a one -on -one setting with
Price in the Sheriff's Office or on other county property.
a. Price typically called the deputies into his office on county time during
normal working hours for the solicitation.
20. Price solicited the deputies to circulate the nominating petitions and provided the
deputies with specific geographic areas to cover.
a. Price explained the process and requirements regarding obtaining
signatures on the petitions.
b. Price typically provided the deputies with a nominating petition and street
listing to assist in obtaining signatures.
1. The street listing provided noted the names, addresses, and political
parties of registered voters in various areas of the county.
c. At least two individuals, deputies Wensel and Dougherty, changed their
party affiliation in order to be able to circulate nominating petitions for Price.
21. After the nominating petitions had been circulated, the majority of the deputies had
the petitions notarized at the Venango County Prothonotary's Office.
a. The forms were notarized on county time.
b. The deputies were not charged a fee for the notary service.
1. The Prothonotary's Office normally did not charge individuals who
circulated nominating petitions a fee for the notary service.
2. The Prothonotary's office normally charged the applicable candidate
a fee when the candidate presented the forms to be notarized.
c. Price purports that he paid all notary fees due to the Prothonotary.
Price, 05 -012
Page 7
22. The majority of the forms were returned to Price in the Sheriff's Office once
notarized.
a. In 2001, Price accompanied Reitz to the Prothonotary's Office and took
possession of the petition immediately after it was notarized.
b. In 2005, Price accompanied Morris to the Prothonotary's Office and took
possession of the petition immediately after it was notarized.
23. The deputies under Price circulated the nominating petitions for a variety of reasons
including the following:
a. Deputies felt obligated to circulate the petitions.
b. Deputies felt it was in their best interest to circulate the petitions as Price
had the authority to hire and fire employees at his discretion.
24. In 2001 and 2005, Price solicited and utilized the services of deputy sheriffs both on
and off county time in connection with nominating petitions in furtherance of his re-
election campaigns which resulted in a loss to the Venango County in wages paid
to deputy sheriffs.
a. Venango County experienced a loss in wages paid to deputies as a result of:
1. Price soliciting and meeting with deputy sheriffs on county time
regarding the circulation of Price's nominating petitions.
2. Deputies having Price's nominating petitions notarized at the
Prothonotary's Office on county time, and
3. Deputies submitting the petitions to Price upon completion while on
county time.
b. The specific loss to the county in deputies' wages as a result of Price's
solicitation could not be determined.
25. In conjunction with his use of deputies, Price also utilized his administrative staff to
further his re- election efforts in 2001 and 2005.
a. Price utilized his administrative staff to generate campaign /re- election
related documents and literature.
26. The Venango County Sheriff's Department employs three individuals in
administrative capacities (See Finding No. 12). [sic]
a. The Administrative Assistant serves as Price's personal secretary in addition
to other duties and responsibilities.
1. The individual in the Administrative Assistant position is responsible
for the generation of letters, correspondence, etc. as directed by
Price.
27. Jamie Flinchbaugh (now Jamie Kirkwood) served as the Real Estate Deputy and
Price's primary secretary /assistant from approximately December 8, 1999 until
December 21, 2001.
a. Flinchbaugh had previously held the position of Clerk Typist II with the
Price, 05 -012
Page 8
Sheriff's Office from February 13, 1998 through December 7, 1999.
b. The Real Estate Deputy position was not a position covered via the Union
contract.
28. Price first requested Flinchbaugh to generate campaign /re- election related
materials during the 2001 election.
a. Flinchbaugh had not been employed with the Sheriff's Office during the 1997
election year.
29. Price approached Flinchbaugh in the Sheriff's Office during regular county working
hours and provided Flinchbaugh with campaign /re- election tasks to complete.
a.
b.
The campaign related tasks were presented by Price with the expectation for
Flinchbaugh to complete them.
Flinchbaugh performed the requested tasks as part of her normal workday.
30. Price provided Flinchbaugh with direction on what was to be generated and
information regarding what was to be included in the documents and literature
generated.
a. Flinchbaugh generated various campaign /re- election documents and
literature on the county computer she utilized in her position as Real Estate
Deputy.
1. Flinchbaugh generated literature for a church related activity to be
included in a church bulletin.
2. Flinchbaugh generated clips for department personnel endorsing
Price which were placed in the local newspaper.
3. Flinchbaugh generated "Thank You" notes from Price which were
advertised in the local newspaper regarding those who had voted for
him in the election.
b. Flinchbaugh generated the documents and literature on her county work
computer at Price's direction.
c. Documents modified or created were printed and provided to Price at Price's
direction.
31. By performing task [sic] relating to Price's campaign /re- election, Flinchbaugh's
normal daily duties were disrupted.
a. Flinchbaugh inferred that she was to complete the campaign /re- election
tasks before working on her normal daily duties.
32. Flinchbaugh created a file on her county work computer titled "Re- Election" in which
to save campaign /re- election documents and literature for Price.
a. Flinchbaugh created the file with Price's knowledge and permission.
b. Flinchbaugh created the file so that any changes or additional information
mandated by Price could be made without re- typing the entire document(s).
Price, 05 -012
Page 9
33. Flinchbaugh was aware that campaigning and campaign /re- election type work was
not permitted to be done on county property on county time.
a. Flinchbaugh completed the tasks requested by Price because Price was her
employer.
b. Flinchbaugh was concerned of possible retaliation by Price if she did not
complete the tasks.
34. Flinchbaugh purports to have utilized a minimum of forty hours of county time in
generating campaign /re- election materials for Price over a two to three week period
regarding the 2001 election.
a. Flinchbaugh purports to have worked on campaign /re- election materials in
the Sheriff's Office approximately four hours per day over a two to three
week period during the 2001 election year.
35. Flinchbaugh was paid an annual salary in her position as Real Estate Deputy.
a. Flinchbaugh received a salary of $16,527.00 in 2001.
1. Flinchbaugh's wage was approximately $7.95 per hour in 2001 based
on a forty -hour workweek ($16,527.00 _ 52 weeks _ 40 hours per
week = $7.95).
36. Presuming Flinchbaugh worked 40 hours as purported, Price realized a private
pecuniary gain of at least $318.00 as a result of Price requesting Flinchbaugh to
perform campaign related activities in association with his re- election campaign
during the 2001 election.
a. Flinchbaugh's hourly ($7.95) X 40 hours = $318.00.
b. Price realized the gain as a result of Price directing Flinchbaugh to perform
campaign related activities while on county time.
c. Price's financial gain as a result of Flinchbaugh using utilizing [sic] county
equipment /materials (i.e. computers, computer printers, paper, etc.) to
complete the activities could not be determined.
1. Price did not incur expenses to his campaign as a result of his use of
space, equipment, and materials to generate campaign related
material.
37. Cynthia Rowland has served as Price's Administrative Assistant from approximately
January 2, 2002 through the present.
a. Rowland had previously held the position of Clerk Typist I1 with the Sheriff's
Office from March 15, 2001 through January 1, 2002.
38. The position of Real Estate Deputy was reclassified to Administrative Assistant 11
after Flinchbaugh transferred from the Sheriff's Office.
a. The Administrative Assistant 11 position is not a position covered via the
Union contract.
b. The individual holding the Administrative Assistant 11 position is paid an
hourly wage.
Price, 05 -012
Page 10
39. Shortly after being hired as a Clerk Typist II, Price questioned Rowland on her
political party affiliation.
a. Rowland informed Price she was a registered Democrat.
b. Rowland switched her political affiliation to Republican as a result of the
conversation that was held with Price.
40. Price first requested Rowland to generate campaign /re- election related materials
during the 2005 election.
a. Although employed with the Sheriff's Office in 2001, Rowland was not
directed to generate any campaign /re- election documents for Price for the
2001 election.
41. Price approached Rowland in the Sheriff's Office during regular county working
hours and directed that Rowland type political endorsements for publication in the
local newspaper regarding the 2005 election.
a. Rowland typed a political endorsement advertisement for Price in
Carbaugh's name on county time on her county work computer.
1. Carbaugh and Price were present at Rowland's workstation while
Rowland typed the endorsement.
b. Rowland typed a political endorsement advertisement for Price in Morris'
name on county time on her county work computer.
c. Rowland typed a political endorsement advertisement for Price in her name
on county time on her county work computer.
d. Rowland printed each of the endorsements on the county printer in the
Sheriff's Office upon completion and provided the printouts to Price.
1. All three endorsements were eventually published in the local
Franklin newspaper.
42. Rowland's workspace is separate from the main office area of the Sheriff's Office.
a. A doorway separates Rowland's office from the main office area.
b. The door between the office and the main office area is normally open.
43. Price was aware that utilizing departmental staff to perform campaign /re- election
activities in the Sheriff's Office on county time was not permitted.
a.
1. Rowland utilized the same basic format that had been utilized for
Carbaugh's advertisement with slight modifications.
1. Rowland utilized the same basic format that had been utilized for
Carbaugh's and Morris' advertisements with slight modifications.
Price closed the door between Rowland's office and the main office area
while the political endorsements were being created.
44. In addition to political endorsements typed by Rowland, Rowland modified existing
NAME
SIZE
TYPE
DATE MODIFIED
2005 Ad (short).doc
26KB
Microsoft Word
04/20/2005 12:31 pm
2005 Ad.doc
22 KB
Microsoft Word
04/20/2005 12:23 pm
2005 Adm. Asst. Ad.doc
22 KB
Microsoft Word
04/28/2005 8:43 am
2005 Chief Deputy Ad.doc
23 KB
Microsoft Word
05/11/2005 9:37 am
2005 Continued Support ...
23 KB
Microsoft Word
05/11/2005 9:47 am
2005 Union Steward Ad.doc
23 KB
Microsoft Word
04/20/2005 1:42 pm
Announcement.doc
27 KB
Microsoft Word
04/08/2005 9:22 am
Experience.doc
20 KB
Microsoft Word
04/26/2001 1:17 pm
Melissa Newspaper.doc
20 KB
Microsoft Word
04/20/2005 10:04 am
Thank You 2" J doc
20 KB
Microsoft Word
11/09/2001 9:15 am
Thank You .doc
25 KB
Microsoft Word
06/06/2005 12:14 pm
Price, 05 -012
Page 11
and /or created new campaign /re- election literature and advertisements on her
county work computer at Price's direction while on county time.
a. Rowland modified, saved, and printed various documents for Price's 2005
campaign that already existed in the "Re- Election" file created by
Flinchbaugh.
b. Rowland created additional documents which were political in nature and
saved the documents to the "Re- Election" file.
c. Documents modified or created were printed and provided to Price at Price's
direction.
45. Rowland was aware that campaigning and performance of campaign /re- election
type work was not permitted to be done on county property on county time.
Rowland's reason(s) for completing the campaign related job assignments
requested by Price are:
a. Price was her employer.
b. She had heard Price make statements that he could terminate employees for
no reason.
46. A screen shot of all documents contained in the "Re- Election" on Rowland's county
work computer file as of November 3, 2005 detailed the names of individual
Microsoft Word documents, document sizes, document types, and dates modified
as shown below:
Documents noted above were created and /or modified by Flinchbaugh or
Rowland during their respective service as Price's Real Estate
Deputy /Administrative Assistant.
47. Price additionally requested Rowland to type his 2005 election year information on
his nominating petitions prior to distribution for circulation.
a. Price provided a minimum of forty -seven nominating petitions to Rowland to
type on two separate occasions.
b. Price provided Rowland with an initial large grouping and a subsequent
smaller grouping.
Price, 05 -012
Page 12
48. Price approached and requested Rowland to type the petitions while in the Sheriff's
Office during her normal work hours.
a. Rowland utilized the county typewriter in the Sheriff's Office during her
normal work hours to type the petitions.
b. Rowland returned the petitions to Price once the required information had
been typed.
49. Rowland was aware that typing information on nominating petitions was not
permitted to be done on county property on county time.
a. Rowland completed the task under the belief she was expected to do so.
50. Rowland purports to have utilized a minimum of eight hours of county time in
generating campaign /re- election materials for Price regarding the 2005 election.
a. Rowland worked on campaign /re- election materials in the Sheriff's Office
periodically throughout the 2005 election year.
51. Rowland was paid an hourly wage in her position as Administrative Assistant 11.
a. Rowland received a wage of $11.52 per hour in 2005.
52. Presuming Rowland worked eight hours as purported, Price realized a private
pecuniary gain of at least $92.16 as a result of his request of Rowland to perform
campaign related activities in association with his re- election campaign during the
2005 election.
a. Price's gain was calculated at $11.52 /hourly rate X 8 hours for a total of
$92.16.
b. Price's financial gain as a result of Rowland's using utilizing [sic] county
equipment /materials (i.e. computers, computer printers, paper, etc.) to
complete the activities could not be determined.
53. The published telephone number for the Venango County Sheriff's Office is (814)
432 -9563.
a. Incoming calls on line (814) 432 -9563 first ring at Rowland's desk.
54. If unanswered by Rowland or if Rowland's extension is busy, the incoming call is re-
routed to one of five remaining extensions in the office and so on until answered.
a. The five remaining extensions are located in Price's office, in Morris' office,
at Department Clerk II Bonnie Smith's desk, Department Clerk II Patrick
Priel's desk, and in the deputies' ready room.
b. All five extensions have direct dial numbers.
55. Calls received can be transferred to any extension throughout the Sheriff's Office
with the exception of the emergency telephone.
a. The emergency telephone is an inter - office phone used to communicate
potential problems throughout the courthouse.
56. During the 2001 and 2005 election years, private citizens independently utilized the
Price, 05 -012
Page 13
Sheriff's Office telephone number as a point of contact regarding questions or when
seeking information related to the re- election campaign.
a. Administrative personnel in the Sheriff's Office occasionally received
campaign related calls at the Sheriff's Office on the various extensions.
b. Campaign related calls were received by Flinchbaugh and Rowland in 2001.
1. Flinchbaugh's wage in 2001 was approximately $7.95 per hour.
2. Rowland's wage in 2001 was $7.32 per hour.
c. Campaign related calls were received by Rowland, Smith, and Jennifer
Valdesalice (Department Clerk 11), in 2005.
1. Rowland's wage in 2005 was $11.52 per hour.
2. Smith's wage in 2005 was $8.20 per hour.
3. Valdesalice's wage in 2005 was $7.88 per hour.
57. Campaign related calls received at the Sheriff's Office in 2001 and 2005 primarily
addressed inquiries from residents for campaign signs (yard signs) to support Price
in the upcoming election.
a. Callers requesting to speak with Price directly were questioned on the nature
of the call prior to its transfer to Price.
1. The nature of the call was requested to avoid nuisance calls to Price.
b. Calls regarding campaign signs usually questioned how campaign signs
could be obtained.
58. Once the nature of the call was determined to be a request for a campaign sign, the
call was transferred to Price if Price was available.
a. If Price was not in or otherwise unavailable, the administrative staff took
messages for Price which included the name of the caller, the reason for the
call, and a call -back number if necessary.
b. Messages taken for Price were placed in Price's "mailbox" in the Sheriff's
Office.
59. Calls requesting campaign signs for Price were occasionally received in the weeks
immediately preceding the primary and general elections.
a. Calls were received on various weekdays.
b. The specific volume of calls received requesting campaign signs could not
be determined for 2001 or 2005.
c. The specific amount of time utilized by the administrative staff in fielding
campaign related calls in 2001 and 2005 could not be determined.
d. Price's specific financial gain regarding the use of Sheriff's Office telephones
and staff members (Flinchbaugh, Rowland, Smith, and Valdesalice) to
answer campaign related calls cannot be determined.
Price, 05 -012
Page 14
60. During the 2001 and 2005 elections, county residents occasionally appeared at the
Sheriff's Office in person and requested campaign signs to display.
a. On at least two occasions in 2001, Price provided campaign signs to
individuals as a result of a request that was made at the Sheriff's Office.
b. On at least one occasion in 2005, Price informed an individual while in the
Sheriff's Office that he had no additional campaign signs at that time.
61. On occasion, individuals appeared at the Sheriff's Office and requested campaign
signs when Price was not present or available.
a. When Price was not available, the administrative staff took messages for
Price and placed the messages in Price's "mailbox."
62. For the 2001 election, Price utilized the services of Edwin Watts Golf Shops,
located at 20 Hill Avenue, Ft. Walton Beach, FL, 32548 for the ordering of
campaign related materials.
a. Price personally purchased twelve dozen promotional golf balls at the total
cost of $236.83 ($227.88 plus $8.95 in freight charges) with a logo printed
on each ball.
1. The logo was a copy of the Venango County Sheriff's department
uniform patch with "Gene Price" printed above the logo.
63. Price provided Edwin Watts Golf Shop with the Sheriff's Office's address and phone
number regarding contact information.
a. The "Ship To" address on the invoice is documented as:
"Price Sheriff, Gene
Venango County Sheriff Office
1168 Liberty St. Courthouse
Franklin, Pa 16323 USA"
1. The address of the Venango County Sheriff's Office is 1168 Liberty
Street, Franklin, Pa 16323.
b. The daytime phone number on the invoice is documented as (814) 432 -9563.
1. The published phone number of the Venango County Sheriff's Office
is (814) 432 -9653. [sic]
2. No other contact number for Price is documented on the invoice.
64. For the 2005 election, Price utilized the services of Donahue Advertising, located at
11205 Helber Road, Logan, OH 43138, to order campaign signs.
65. Price received and personally paid an invoice from Donahue Advertising via
facsimile transmission dated April 4, 2005, for the purchase of two hundred fifty 16"
x 26 "double sided signs with frames in the total amount of $670.95 ($552.00 plus
$118.95 in shipping and handling).
a. An image of the sign ordered and the wording on the sign was present on
the invoice.
Price, 05 -012
Page 15
b. Price received the facsimile transmission via the fax machine at the Sheriff's
Office.
66. Price provided Donahue Advertising with the Sheriff's Office's address, phone
number, and facsimile number regarding contact information.
a. The "Ship To" address on the invoice is documented as:
" Venango Co. Sheriff
Gene Price Sheriff
1168 Liberty St.
Franklin, Pa 16323"
1. The address of the Venango County Sheriff's Office is 1168 Liberty
Street, Franklin, Pa 16323.
b. The phone number on the invoice is documented as (814) 432 -9563.
1. The published phone number of the Venango County Sheriff's Office
is (814) 432 -9653. [sic]
c. The fax number on the invoice is documented as (814) 437 -2324.
1. The facsimile number of the Venango County Sheriff's Office is (814)
437 -2324.
67. Documentation on the invoice noted that in order for production to be started the
invoice must be signed and faxed back with a copy of the check for payment.
a. Price was required to sign the invoice and fax it to Donahue Advertising to
ensure that all information on the invoice was correct, including the shipping,
quantity, size, color and ad copy prior to the start of production.
68. Price utilized the facsimile machine in the Sheriff's Office to fax the invoice back to
Donahue Advertising verifying the information on the invoice.
a. The facsimile transmission identifier at the top of the invoice documents,
"Apr. 4. 2005 12:06PM Sheriff Gene Price."
b. Price's signature is documented at the bottom of the invoice.
c. The specific date the signs were delivered to the sheriff's office could not be
determined.
d. Price purports that it was common practice to utilize the county fax machine
for personal use, provided the user pay a $2.00 fee per transmission. Price
purports he paid such fee when utilizing the Sheriff Department fax machine.
Other than Price's assertions, the Investigative Division has no information
regarding this practice.
69. Price utilized his private office in the Sheriff's office to store campaign signs during
the 2005 primary election.
a. Price stored four boxes of campaign signs and posts in his office for at least
two days following delivery of such.
Price, 05 -012
Page 16
b. Price specifically utilized the services of Dougherty, Foy, and Myers to carry
the four boxes of campaign signs out of the Sheriff's Office during the 2005
election year.
70. Venango County maintains an established policy regarding county property which
notes, in part, the following:
a. All property and /or equipment purchased or leased by or under the auspices
of the County of Venango is to be utilized by employees, or authorized
users, for its intended purposes only.
b. County employees or authorized users are responsible for the proper use
and maintenance of property and /or equipment that may be assigned to
them in order to perform the duties of their respective positions.
71. Price's requests to employees to perform services related to his re- election
campaign with county equipment (i.e. computers, typewriters, and telephones) was
in contradiction of the county policy regarding county property.
a. Price requested subordinate employees to utilize county equipment for
purposes other than its intended use.
b. As Sheriff, Price was responsible to ensure that county property in the
sheriff's office was used in accordance with county policy.
72. Venango County owns the County Exchange Building located at 1283 Liberty
Street, Franklin, Pa, 16323.
a. The county exchange building provides office space for the county human
service agencies (i.e. Children and Youth Services, Mental Health /Mental
Retardation, Office of Aging, etc.).
73. Agencies housed in the County Exchange Building pay an annual building usage
fee to Venango County for office space, maintenance, and utilities.
a. The fee paid is based on the specific cost per square foot that the county
could obtain for the office space in the commercial real estate market.
1. The fee is paid annually and is determined by multiplying the total
square footage per department by the determined value per square
foot.
74. The square foot value of the property is currently determined via annual studies
conducted by Maximus, Inc.
a. The 2001 study was conducted by Zelenkofske Axelrod, LLC.
75. Fees paid by the Human Services Agencies run approximately two years behind.
a. Studies conducted to determine the fair market value per square foot of
office space in the County Exchange Building are based on the annual audit
conducted for the county.
1. The annual audit for the county for any respective year must be
completed by September 30 of the following year.
2. The per square foot value of the space at the County Office Building
Price, 05 -012
Page 17
is not determined until the end of the year in which the audit is
conducted or the beginning of the following year.
aa. The actual 2005 figure regarding the per square foot value
determined for office space in the County Exchange Building
will not be determined until late 2006 /early 2007.
76. Office space located in the County Exchange Building is comparable to that located
in the county courthouse in regard to condition, accessibility, etc.
a. In 2001 the square footage value associated with office space in the County
Exchange Building was $10.65 per square foot.
b. In 2004 the square footage value associated with office space in the County
Exchange Building was $8.39 per square foot.
77. Depreciation in the fair market value of office space in the County Exchange
Building totaled $2.26 per square foot from 2001 to 2004 ($10.65 /square foot —
$8.39 /square foot = $2.26).
a. Average depreciation between 2001 and 2004 for office space in the County
Exchange Building totaled $0.75 per square foot per year.
b. The value of office space at the County Exchange Building in 2005 was
$7.64 per square foot based on average depreciation figures.
78. The Venango County Courthouse is composed of approximately 23,842 square feet
of usable space.
a. The Sheriff's Office is located in the county courthouse (See Finding No. 16).
[sic]
b. The Sheriff's Office accounts for approximately 1,356 square feet of the
usable space in the county courthouse.
79. Aside from the County Exchange Building, other buildings are available for office
rental.
a. Other offices are available for rental within the same city block as the
Venango County Courthouse.
b. It may be possible to rent a 1,230 square foot, street -front office, for as little
as $400.00 per month.
80. The fair market value per square foot for the rental of office space for campaign
purposes similar to that of the Sheriff's Office ranged from approximately $4,800.00
to $14,441.00 annually in 2001 and $4,800.00 to $10,360.00 annually in 2005.
a. The average cost for the rental of a campaign office, comparable to the
Sheriff's Office, in 2001 ranged from $400.00 to $1,203.00 per month
($4,800.00 _ 12 = $400.00/$14,441.00 _ 12 = $1,203.00).
b. The average cost for the rental of a campaign office, comparable to the
Sheriff's Office, in 2004 ranged from $400.00 to $863.00 per month
($4,800.00 _ 12 = $400.00/$10,360.00 _ 12 = $863.00).
c. Price purports, and the Investigative Division has no information to the
Price, 05 -012
Page 18
contrary, that only a portion of the Sheriff's Office was used for campaign
purposes -- not the entire available office space.
81. Price utilized the Sheriff's Office as a campaign office in 2001 and 2005 (excepting
the 2005 general election) in that:
a. Price distributed nominating petitions to and collected nominating petitions
from deputies in the Sheriff's Office while on county time in support of his re-
election campaign,
b. Price utilized the services of his Real Estate Deputy and subsequently his
Administrative Assistant to generate re- election /campaign related material in
the Sheriff's Office on county time with county equipment in support of his re-
election campaign,
c. Price had campaign signs and other re- election /campaign type material from
vendors delivered to the Sheriff's Office on approximately two occasions, in
support of his re- election campaign.
1. Price provided the address of the Sheriff's Office to vendors regarding
shipping /delivery destinations.
2. Price provided vendors the telephone number of the Sheriff's Office
as a contact number.
d. Price utilized county telephones in the Sheriff's Office to receive occasional
re- election /campaign related calls which were routinely answered and routed
to Price during normal county working hours by administrative personnel.
1. Price utilized administrative personnel to take re- election campaign
messages during normal county working hours when he was not
available.
e. Price utilized the county facsimile machine in the Sheriff's Office to send and
receive at least one facsimile transmission to a vendor for the purpose of
ordering re- election /campaign signs.
f. Four boxes of campaign signs and materials were delivered to the Sheriff's
Office and were stored in Price's private office within the Sheriff's
Department. Price purports these items were only stored for two days and
were removed within that time to his private residence.
82. Price's use of the Sheriff's Office for re- election /campaign activities began as early
as the February prior to the 2001 Primary Elections and as late as November
regarding the General Election of 2001. Additionally, the Sheriff's Office was used
for re- election /campaign activities as early as February regarding the 2005 primary
election.
a. Re- election /campaign related activities occurred on a more significant basis
as the actual Primary and General Election dates for the 2001 and 2005
elections neared.
83. Price potentially realized a financial gain ranging from approximately $2,400.00 to
$5,612.00 as a result of utilizing the Venango County Sheriff's Office in conjunction
with his re- election campaign for the 2001 and 2005 election years.
a. Price could have realized a financial gain ranging from an estimated
Price, 05 -012
Page 19
$1,600.00 to $4,812.00 as a result of operating his re- election campaign
from the Sheriff's Office in 2001.
1. The figure was based on the rental of office space for four months
(two for the Primary Election and two for the General Election) at
rates ranging from $400.00 to $1,203.00 per month.
b. Price could have realized a financial gain ranging from an estimated $800.00
to $1,726.00 as a result of operating his re- election campaign from the
Sheriff's Office in 2005.
1. The figure was based on the rental of office space for two months (for
the Primary Election) at rates ranging from $400.00 to $863.00 per
month.
THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO PRICE'S FAILURE TO DISCLOSE
SOURCES OF INCOME ON HIS 2002 AND 2003 CALENDAR YEAR STATEMENTS
OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS
84. Statement of Financial Interests filing requirements for public officials and public
employees are mandated by Section 1104 of the State Ethics Act.
a. Price was required to file Statements of Financial Interests by May 1
annually in his position as the Venango County Sheriff.
85. A Statement of Financial Interests review conducted on May 17, 2005 at the
Venango County Courthouse Annex verified Price's knowledge of his filing
requirements in his position as the Venango County Sheriff.
a. The review revealed Statements of Financial Interests on file for Price
regarding calendar years 2002 through 2004.
86. Information required to be reported on Statements of Financial Interests is set forth
under Section 1105 of the State Ethics Act.
a. Required disclosures on Statements of Financial Interests include the name
and address of any direct or indirect sources of income totaling $1,300.00 or
more.
87. Price did not fully disclose information regarding direct or indirect sources of income
on his Statements of Financial Interests filed for calendar years 2002 and 2003,
constituting a technical violation of 65 Pa. Code §1105(b)(5).
a. Price failed to disclose income received from Venango County in his position
of county sheriff for calendar years 2002.
1. Price's IRS Form W -2 Wage and Tax Statement for calendar year
2002 documents income from Venango County in the amount of
$38,293.58.
b. Price failed to disclose income received from Venango County in his position
of county sheriff for calendar years 2003.
1. Price's IRS Form W -2 Wage and Tax Statement for calendar year
2003 documents income from Venango County in the amount of
$39,442.52.
Price, 05 -012
Page 20
88. Statements of Financial Interests filed by Price for 2002 and 2003 disclosed that he
was employed by /held the office of Sheriff for Venango County, but Price failed to
indicate such as a source of income.
89. On or before March 14, 2006, Price had filed amended Statements of Financial
Interests with the Venango County Administrator /Chief Clerk, reflecting Venango
County as a direct source of income.
90. Price alleges that since the initiation of the investigation by the State Ethics
Commission in or about June of 2005, Price has sought legal counsel and purports
to have promptly discontinued the activities described above. The Investigative
Division has no information regarding Price's purported activities and will neither
deny nor confirm his current adherence to the Ethics Act.
III. DISCUSSION:
At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Gene Price (Price), 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 Price, as Venango County Sheriff, violated Sections
1103(a) and 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act when he used employees, office equipment, and
supplies of the Venango County Sheriff's Office for his re- election; and when he failed to
disclose all sources of income in excess of $1,300 on Statements of Financial Interests
(SFIs) filed for the 2002 and 2003 calendar years.
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 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
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
Price, 05 -012
Page 21
employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a
member of his immediate family is associated.
§ 1105. Statement of financial interests
(b) Required information. - -The statement shall
include the following information for the prior calendar year
with regard to the person required to file the statement:
(5) 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.
65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(b)(5.
Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act, which 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.
Price has served as the Venango County Sheriff since January of 1986. As a
county row officer, Price has the power to hire and fire employees in his office. Currently,
Price has 14 employees: 11 full -time law enforcement officers, including himself, and three
administrative support personnel. The Deputy Sheriffs and two of his administrative staff
are union employees. The non -union employees do not receive the same rights and
benefits as those who are covered under the union contract.
Price has used the office, equipment, Deputy Sheriffs and other staff in his row
office for his re- election campaign in 2001 and for the 2005 primary election. In this
regard, Price does not maintain a campaign office or any other separate space for
campaign or re- election activities. Price does not have a campaign manager, secretary,
treasurer or any paid help to assist in his campaign.
Candidates for public office must file nominating petitions with the County Board of
Elections. After the requisite signatures are obtained on the nominating petition, the
individual circulating the petition must sign an Affidavit of Circulator and have his signature
notarized. The candidate must then submit the petition, sign the Candidate's Affidavit and
Loyalty Oath, and have his signature notarized.
Since at least 1997, Venango County has implemented a policy that prohibits
campaign or election activities by candidates or their representatives on county property.
Notices are publicly displayed by the county at different locations to inform candidates,
employees or representatives about the county's prohibition regarding
campaigning /electioneering.
In the Spring of 2001 and 2005, Price used his Deputies for re- election purposes to
circulate nominating petitions on his behalf. With the exception of Deputy Fox, six other
Deputies circulated the nominating petitions for Price. Similarly in 2005, seven individuals
in Price's office circulated nominating petitions for him, with Deputies Bean and Foy not
engaging in such activities. The solicitation by Price of his Deputies as to nominating
petitions occurred in the Sheriff's Office or at other county property during normal working
Price, 05 -012
Page 22
hours. During those times, Price explained the process and requirements as to circulating
the nominating petitions and then gave to his employees the nominating petitions and
street listings to assist in obtaining the signatures. Further, at least two of Price's
employees had to change their party registration, given the legal requirement that the
individuals soliciting signatures had to be in the same party.
After the employees in Price's office obtained the nominating petitions, they had the
forms notarized while working on county time. The Deputies circulated Price's nominating
petitions because they felt obligated to do so and believed that it was in their best interest
to do so, given that Price had the authority to hire or fire employees at his discretion.
Venango County experienced a loss in wages for Price's employees for engaging in such
re- election activities during county time.
In addition to utilizing Deputies, Price also used his administrative staff to further his
re- election activities by having them generate campaign /re- election documents and
literature. Jamie Flinchbaugh, who served as Price's Real Estate Deputy and primary
secretary /assistant, was requested to generate campaign /re- election materials for his 2001
election. Price approached Flinchbaugh during regular working hours to do the tasks as
part of her normal work day. Flinchbaugh used the county computer to generate literature
for department personnel endorsing Price and "Thank You" notes from Price for individuals
who voted for him. Such political ads would appear in the advertisement section of a local
newspaper. Flinchbaugh also created a file on her county work computer entitled "Re-
Election" to save the campaign /re- election documents and literature for Price. By
performing such tasks during county work time, Flinchbaugh's normal daily hours were
disrupted by working on the campaign /re- election activities.
Flinchbaugh performed such tasks even though she knew that she was not
permitted to engage in such activities utilizing county property on county time. However,
Flinchbaugh performed the tasks because Price was her employer and because of
possible retaliation by Price. Flinchbaugh spent a minimum of 40 hours of county time
working on the campaign /re- election materials for Price for the 2001 election. Based on
Flinchbaugh's salary, such activities generated a private pecuniary gain to Price of at least
$318 for Flinchbaugh's activities as to his 2001 election.
Cynthia Rowland worked in Price's office as an administrative assistant. When
Price learned that Rowland was a registered Democrat, she switched her affiliation to
Republican as a result of that conversation with Price. Price directed Rowland to generate
campaign /re- election activities for the 2005 election. Price approached Rowland during
regular county hours and directed her to type political endorsements for publication in the
local newspaper for the 2005 election. Rowland used the county computer during regular
county work time to type the political endorsement/advertisement. Rowland prepared three
endorsements, the hard copies of which were produced by the printer in the Sheriff's Office
and eventually published in a local newspaper.
Even though Price was aware that utilizing departmental staff, equipment and
facilities to engage in campaign re- election activities in the Sheriff's Office on county time
was not permitted, he nevertheless directed staff to engage in such activities. Rowland
knew that such campaign re- election activities were not permitted to be done during
normal working hours on county property utilizing county equipment but she engaged in
such activity because Price was her employer who could terminate employees at will.
Price also had Rowland type his 2005 election year information on the nominating
petitions that were done in the Sheriff's office during normal working hours. Rowland did
the work even though she knew that typing information on nominating petitions on county
property during county work hours was not permitted. In that Rowland worked a minimum
of eight hours on county time to perform such work, the pecuniary benefit to Price for such
work amounted to $92.16.
Price, 05 -012
Page 23
During both the 2001 and 2005 elections, individuals utilized the Sheriff's office
telephone number as a contact point for matters relating to the re- election campaign.
Campaign related calls were received by Flinchbaugh, Rowland and two other personnel,
Smith and Valdesalice, in the Sheriff's Office. The calls typically related to obtaining
campaign signs for placement in the yards of people who supported Price in the upcoming
election. Individuals would also appear at the Sheriff's office in person and request
campaign signs for display.
Price utilized the services of a golf shop to purchase golf balls and patches with
Price logos on the items. As to such purchases, the telephone number for the Venango
Sheriff's Office was used without any other listed contact point.
Price also utilized the services of an advertising agency for the purchase of
campaign signs and frames. The paperwork for such transaction was done utilizing the fax
machine in the Sheriff's office. The phone contact number on the invoice listed the
telephone number of the Sheriff's office as well as the fax machine number. After Price
reviewed the order, he was directed to sign the invoice and fax it back to the advertising
agency, which he did by utilizing the fax machine in the Sheriff's office. Price also utilized
the Sheriff's office to store campaign signs for the 2005 primary election.
Price directed his employees to perform re- election campaign services utilizing
county equipment, such as computers, typewriters and telephones, in contravention of the
county policy that prohibited using county property for such purposes. In that Price utilized
the County Sheriffs' Office for engaging in campaign /re- election activities, the Investigative
Division obtained comparables in terms of rental charges for similarly situate office space.
The range of such fair market value comparables varied between $4,800 and $14,441 for
the year 2001 and $4,800 to $10,360 for 2005.
In summary, Price utilized the Sheriff's office for the 2001 campaign and for the
2005 primary but not general election: distributing and collecting nominating petitions;
utilizing the services of the real estate deputy and administrative assistant to generate re-
election /campaign materials; ordering and receiving campaign materials at the Sheriff's
office; utilizing county telephones for occasional re- election /campaign related calls;
utilizing the county fax machine in the Sheriff's office to send and receive transmissions
relating to re- election /campaign orders of signs; and storing boxes of materials and
campaign signs in the Sheriff's office. As a result of engaging in such activities. Price
potentially realized a financial gain of between $2,400 and $5,612 for utilizing the Venango
County Sheriff's Office for the 2001 re- election and the 2005 primary election.
Price asserts that since the commencement of this investigation, he has
discontinued the above activities, although such statement has not been verified by the
Investigative Division of this Commission.
Turning to SFIs, an audit was conducted in May of 2005 at the courthouse annex.
That review indicates that Price did not fully disclose information regarding direct or
indirect sources of income on his SFIs for calendar years 2002 and 2003 as to his income
as County Sheriff. Price did disclose on the SFIs that he held the office of Sheriff of
Venango County. In March of 2006, Price filed amended SFIs with Venango County
reflecting the county as a source of income for those two years.
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:
Price, 05 -012
Page 24
"3. The Investigative Division will recommend the following in relation to the
above allegations:
a. That a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a) occurred when
Price, as Sheriff of Venango County, used the authority of his
office for private pecuniary gain by utilizing employees, office
equipment and supplies of the Venango County Sheriff's Office
for personal purposes, namely by using employees, equipment
and supplies in conjunction with his election campaign of 2001
and 2005; and
b. That a technical violation of Sections 1105(b)(5) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Law, 65 Pa.C.S. §1105(b)(5)
occurred in relation to Price failing to disclose on the 2002
calendar year Statement of Financial Interests sources of
income, totaling in the aggregate $1,300 or more, namely his
compensation from Venango County as Sheriff; and
c. That a technical violation of Section 1105(b)(5) of the Public
Official and Employee Ethics Law, 65, Pa.C.S. §1105(b)(5)
occurred in relation to Price failing to disclose on the 2003
calendar year Statement of Financial Interests sources of
income, totaling in the aggregate $1,300 or more, namely his
compensation from Venango County as Sheriff.
4. Price agrees to make payment in the amount of $3,000 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.
5. Price has filed amended Statements of Financial Interests correcting
all deficiencies identified in the Findings of Fact, concerning his 2002
and 2003 Statement of Financial Interests forms.
6. Price agrees to cease and desist from any present and /or future use
of county employees, facilities, equipment and supplies (including but
not limited to sheriff deputies, sheriff office staff, sheriff office
facilities, sheriff office equipment and supplies) for any
personal /private pecuniary gain, including, but not limited to, all
political activity.
7 Price agrees to abstain from any action which may be perceived as a
retaliatory response against any individual, or group of individuals,
who have cooperated with the instant investigation and filing of this
matter. Should Price engage in such behavior, the Commission is not
precluded from formulating an appropriate response, including the
filing of sanctions."
Consent Agreement, ¶ ¶3 -7.
In applying Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the stipulated facts, there were uses
of authority of office on the part of Price. But for the fact that Price was the elected Sheriff
of Venango County, he could not have been in a position to utilize the Sheriff's Office, the
staff, the equipment, supplies and the space for storage as to campaign /re- election
activities. All such activities that occurred were pursuant to directives from Price who, as
the elected head of the row office, had the authority to hire or fire employees and utilize
Price, 05 -012
Page 25
such office equipment, personnel and supplies as per his directions. All such activities for
the 2001 election and the 2005 primary election resulted in pecuniary benefits to Price. By
utilizing such county property and employees during regular working hours, Price had no
out -of- pocket expenses that he would otherwise have to pay for those services. Further,
the pecuniary benefits were private. It is a fundamental tenent under the Ethics Act that
unless a pecuniary benefit is authorized in law, it is private. See, Hessinger, Order 931.
In this case, there was no authorization for Price to utilize county property and employees
for such purposes. To the contrary, such actions were specifically prohibited. See, Fact
Findings 13 -15. Lastly, those private pecuniary benefits inured to Price. Accordingly,
Price violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he, as Venango County Sheriff,
utilized county employees, office equipment and supplies during regular working hours for
election campaigns in 2001 and 2005. The above result is consistent with a plethora of
precedent of this Commission that public officials /public employees may not use their
position to utilize governmental office equipment, supplies or personnel for campaign, re-
election or business purposes. See, Freind, Order 800; Rockefeller, Order 1004;
Livingston, Order 1030; Habay, Order 1313; Lynch, Order (1334).
As to the SFI allegations for calendar years 2002 and 2003, the stipulated findings
reflect that Price failed to list the County Sheriff's Office as a source of income of $1,300 or
more for those two calendar years. The record further reflects that Price did list the
Sheriff's Office as the public position that he held. Price has now filed amended SFIs for
those two calendar years listing the Sheriff's Office as a source of income. Accordingly,
Price technically violated Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act in each instance when he
failed to list the Venango County Sheriff's Office as a source of income on his 2002 and
2003 calendar year SFIs. See, Antico, Order 1061.
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, Price is directed to
make payment in the amount of $3,000 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. 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.
Lastly, we note that as part of the Consent Agreement, Price both agrees to cease
and desist from any use of county property or employees for any type of political activity or
private pecuniary benefit and also abstain from any actions that may be perceived as
retaliation against any individual who has cooperated relative to this investigation. In this
regard, we must remind Price that he is a public official and he holds an office of public
trust. Price must comport himself so that his actions fall within both the letter as well as the
spirit of the Ethics Act. Any further failure in that regard will cause this Commission to take
appropriate action.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Gene Price, as Venango County Sheriff, is a public (official /employee) subject to
the provisions of Act 9 of 1989 as codified by Act 93 of 1998.
2. Price violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he, as Venango County
Sheriff, utilized county employees, office equipment and supplies during regular
working hours for election campaigns in 2001 and 2005.
3. Price technically violated Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act in each instance
when he failed to list the Venango County Sheriff's Office as a source of income on
his 2002 and 2003 calendar year SFIs.
In Re: Gene Price,
Respondent
ORDER NO. 1409
File Docket: 05 -012
Date Decided: 10/4/2006
Date Mailed: 10/20/2006
1 Gene Price, as Venango County Sheriff, violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act
when he, as Venango County Sheriff, utilized county employees, office equipment
and supplies during regular working hours for election campaigns in 2001 and
2005.
2. Price technically violated Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act in each instance
when he failed to list the Venango County Sheriff's Office as a source of income on
his 2002 and 2003 calendar year Statements of Financial Interests.
3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Price is directed to make payment in the
amount of $3,000 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 and agrees to cease and desist from any use of
county property or employees for any type of political activity or private pecuniary
benefit and also abstain from any actions that may be perceived as retaliation
against any individual who has cooperated relative to this investigation. Any
further failure in that regard will cause this Commission to take appropriate action.
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