Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1787 LarkPHONE: 717-783-1610 TOLL FREE: 1-800-932.0936 In Re: Robert Lark, Respondent SlAFE E'f,%ICS COIT-MISISION— FINANCE BUILDING fvsftift i MIld File Docket: X-ref- Date Decided Date Mailed: FACMILE: 717-787-0806 WEBSITE: wwwethics.pa,gov 20-009 Order No. 1797 6/23/21 6/28/21 Before: Nicholas A. Colafella, Chair Mark R. Corrigan, Vice Chair Roger Nick Melanie DePalma Michael A. Schwartz Shelley Y. Simms This, is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission, Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission conducted an investigation regarding possible violation(s) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa,C.S. § 1101 et sue., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegations. Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint."' A Stipulation of Findings and a Consent Agreement were subsequently submitted by the parties to the Commission for consideration. The Stipulated Findings are set forth as the Findings in this Order. The Consent Agreement has been approved. 1. ALLEGATIONS: That Robert Lark, a public official/public employee in his capacity as a Member and President of West Middlesex Borough Council ("Council"), Mercer County, violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), 1105(b)(1), and 1105(b)(4) of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) when he utilized the authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family, and/or a business with which a member of his immediate family is associated, namely Donald Lark and Sons, Inc. ("DLS"), when he participated in actions and decisions of Council to authorize repairs to Borough streets and alleys to be completed by DLS; when he directed DLS to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council; when he participated in actions of Council to approve issuance of payments to DLS; and when he failed to file calendar year 2016 and 2017 Statements of Financial Interests with the Borough, filed deficient Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2015 and 2018 when he failed to identify all public positions held and failed to identify an interest rate regarding disclosures of creditors, and failed to identify the proper filing year for calendar year 2015. Lark, 20-008 Page 2 H. FINDINGS: 1. Robert F. Lark ("Lark") has served as a Member of Council for the Borough of West Middlesex ("Borough"), Mercer County, from January 4, 2016, through the present. a. Lark served as the President of Borough Council ("Council") from January 2, 2018, to January 2, 2020. 2. The Borough is governed by a five -Member Council and a Mayor. 3. Council convenes for regular Council meetings once per month on the third Tuesday. a. Council holds publicly advertised work sessions on the second Wednesday of each month. b. Special meetings are called as needed. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO DONALD LARK & SONS, INC. AND THE PENN AVENUE PROJECT. 4. Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. ("DLS") is a privately -owned entity that provides excavating, grading, and trucking services. a. DLS filed Articles of Incorporation with the Pennsylvania Department of State on November 30, 1990. 1. Ownership of DLS was passed through family members prior to Donald Lark Jr.'s filing of the Articles of Incorporation. 2. Donald Lark Jr. assumed DLS's operations in or around 1984. 5. DLS has been owned by Donald Lark Jr. since at least November 30, 1990. 6. Since at least January 2017, multiple members of Lark's immediate family, including Donald Lark Jr. and John Lark Sr., have been involved/associated with the operation of DLS. a. Donald Lark Jr. is Lark's brother and a member of his immediate family. b. John Lark Sr. is Lark's brother and a member of his immediate family. 7. On February 16, 2016, Council passed a motion to seek bids for a project on Penn Avenue via unanimous 5-0 vote. 8. Borough Secretary/Treasurer Tammy Garrett placed an invitation for bids in The Herald newspaper on or around February 22 and 29, 2016. Lark, 20-008 Page 3 a. Bids for the Penn Avenue project were to be submitted to, and received by, the Borough no later than March 15, 2016, at 3:00 p.m. 9. The Borough received at least eight bids in response to its solicitation/invitation for bids regarding the Penn Avenue project, as detailed below: Bidder Address Bid Amount Pro -Care Landscaping & Construction 54 Phillips Way, Suite 2, Sharon, PA 16146 $114,041.00 Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. 3 Garfield Street, West Middlesex, PA 16159 $131,638.50 J & T Paving, Inc. 108 Grant Street, Greenville, PA 16125 $139,000.00 Utility Contracting, Inc. 321 South Meridian Road, Youngstown, OH 44509 $148,145.00 J.S. Bova Excavating, LLC 12240 Commissioner Drive, North Jackson, OH 44451 $ I48,813.00 Combine Construction 1306 Furnace Road, Sharon, PA 16146 $163,567.50 David Construction Company 1991 South Hermitage Road, Hermitage, PA 16148 $178,324,00 Strange Corporation 471 West Mercer Street, Harrisville, PA 16038 $289,850.75 Note: Bid submittal dates were unavailable. 10. On March 15, 2016, Council awarded the Penn Avenue project to Pro -Care Landscaping & Construction ("Pro -Care"), as the lowest bidder, in the amount of $114,041.00 via unanimous 5-0 vote. a. Lark was not present and did not participate or vote on the motion to hire Pro -Care. b. During the same meeting, the motion to award the Penn Avenue project to Pro -Care was rescinded via unanimous 6-0 vote. 1. Lark was present and voted in favor of rescinding the motion. C. Lark subsequently motioned during the March 15, 2016, Council meeting to table the Penn Avenue project bid acceptance until the March 22, 2016, legislative meeting. 1. The motion carried by unanimous 6-0 vote. 2. Lark was present and voted in favor of tabling the acceptance of the Penn Avenue project bid. 11. On March 22, 2016, Council again awarded the Penn Avenue project to Pro -Care in the amount of $114,041.00 via 4-0-1 vote. a. Lark was present and abstained from the vote to hire Pro -Care. b. Prior to Council's consideration of the Penn Avenue project, Lark's relationship to DLS had been fully disclosed to the Borough Solicitor, the Borough Engineer, and the other Members of Council. 12. Pro -Care began the Penn Avenue project in or about May 2016. Lark, 20-008 Page 4 a. The Penn Avenue project began after Council was informed of changes to be made based on the advice of the Mercer County Conservation District during the May 17, 2016, Board meeting. 13. During construction, Pro -Care failed to remove enough rock, causing the vaults to be installed too high, thus the vaults did not work/drain water as intended by the designs/specifications of Borough Engineer Clayton Fails ("Borough Engineer Fails"). a. Pro-Care's failure to adhere to construction specifications resulted in Pro -Care being declared in default of its contract with the Borough. Council authorized the President of Council to sign the Notice of Intent to Terminate Services for the Penn Avenue project during the December 20, 2016, legislative meeting. 14. On December 20, 2016, the Borough sent a Notice of Intent to Terminate letter addressed to Levio Baldarelli, Pro -Care Landscape & Construction, Richard Kukosky and Kim Czasp, Philadelphia Insurance Companies, and Borough Engineer Fails, Greenman - Pedersen, Inc. a. The letter detailed Pro-Care's failure to perform the services on the Penn Avenue project and the Borough's unsuccessful efforts to bring the work into compliance with the project contract. b. The letter served as Pro-Care's written notice of termination of services in relation to the Penn Avenue project. 15. After Pro-Care's services were terminated, Council discussed the Penn Avenue project during multiple regular and/or special meetings to provide general updates and to determine how to proceed with the unfinished project. a. At a minimum, Council discussed the Penn Avenue project during Council meetings held on March 27, 2017; April 11, 2017; May 17, 2017; May 30, 2017; and June 13, 2017. 16. On March 27, 2017, discussions were held to determine what the Borough had paid, how much funding remained, and who would finish the Penn Avenue project. a. Lark was present at the March 27, 2017, Council meeting at which no motions were made or actions taken with regard to the Penn Avenue project. 17. On April 11, 2017, Solicitor Robert Tesone ("Solicitor Tesone") informed Council that he and not Lark had contacted several contractors and provided information relating to how the Borough could proceed with the Penn Avenue project. Lark, 20-008 Page S a. Lark was present at the April 11, 2017, legislative meeting, but he did not vote or participate in any discussion regarding the Penn Avenue project. b. Solicitor Tesone, and not Lark, then contacted Combine Construction and Kirila Construction, and he was informed that McLallen Construction in Erie, Pennsylvania was interested in completing the Penn Avenue project. C. Solicitor Tesone informed Council the next step would be "part formal and part informal" as: 1. The Borough will not advertise for bids; and 2. The Borough would have open bid packages for contractors that the Borough knows are competent and would do a good job. 18, On May 17, 2017, Council held a conference call with Borough Engineer Fails to discuss the proposed "informal bid process" for the Penn Avenue project. a. Lark was present at the May 17, 2017, Council meeting, but he did not vote and abstained from taking action on any matters relating to the Penn Avenue project. b. Solicitor Tesone told Borough Engineer Fails that Kirila Construction, Combine Construction, McLallen Construction, Inc., and. DLS were all contacted. 1. Solicitor Tesone contacted and spoke with representatives of Combine Construction on April 6, 2017, and April 7, 2017. 2. Solicitor Tesone contacted and spoke with representatives of Kirila Construction on April 7, 2017. 3. At the request of Solicitor Tessone, and with the full knowledge of the other Members of Council, Lark personally contacted DLS, the company owned by his brother. C. Combine Construction and Kirila Construction had no interest in the Penn Avenue project, as neither was available due to other work throughout the summer. d. DLS and McLallen Construction, Inc. expressed interest in completing the project. e. Solicitor Tesone, and not Lark, requested that Borough Engineer Fails provide all diagrams and specifications to DLS and McLallen Construction, Inc. f. Solicitor Tesone and Borough Engineer Fails agreed that informal bids from DLS and McLallen Construction, Inc. were to be received by May 30, 2017, at 6:00 p.m. Lark,20-008 Page 6 19. DLS did not submit a bid to the Borough and/or any Borough representatives for the completion of the Penn Avenue project. a. Borough Engineer Fails had spoken with representatives of DLS prior to May 30, 2017, and subsequently informed Council during the May 30, 2017, Council meeting that DLS would not be submitting a bid in relation to the Penn Avenue proj ect. 20. McLallen Construction, Inc. was the only company and/or contractor who subsequently submitted a bid to the Borough in relation to the Penn Avenue project. a. McLallen Construction, Inc.'s bid was opened at Council's May 30, 2017, legislative meeting. b. McLallen Construction, Inc.'s bid totaled $104,360.00, and the grant balance was $54,000.00. 21. The Council and Borough Engineer Fails publicly discussed at the May 30, 2017, meeting, the approximate remaining Penn Avenue project grant balance of $54,000.00 and the grant's expiration of September 2017. a. Minutes of the May 30, 2017, meeting document the presence of a DLS representative at the meeting. b. Immediately following the DLS representative's discussion with Council, and with Solicitor Tesone present, Lark questioned if there was a possibility to "reexamine the scope of the project, to redesign the project to make it more affordable." 1. Borough Engineer Fails verbally supported Lark's suggestion. 22. A Council Member ultimately motioned at the May 30, 2017, meeting to table the bid for the Penn Avenue project. a. The motion passed unanimously via 5-0 vote. b. Lark was present and voted in favor of tabling the bids for the Penn Avenue project. 23. On May 31, 2017, at approximately 3:55 p.m., Solicitor Tesone emailed DLS a copy of the bid that McLallen Construction, Inc. submitted to the Borough in relation to the Penn Avenue project. a. Solicitor Tesone requested DLS to review the bid. b. Solicitor Tesone advised that he, and not Lark, would contact DLS in the near future to discuss any role DLS may wish to play in the Penn Avenue project. Lark, 20-008 Page 7 24. On or around June 5, 2017, with the knowledge and approval of Council, Lark, Solicitor Tesone, and Borough Engineer Fails met with John Lark Sr. and John Lark Jr. (John Lark Sr.'s son) to discuss the Penn Avenue project. a. John Lark Sr. and John Lark Jr. reviewed DLS's plans for the Penn Avenue project. I. John Lark Jr. is employed as the Project Manager at DLS. b. Since no other Council Members were available, Lark was the only Council Member in attendance at the meeting with DLS. 25. During the June 13, 2017, Council meeting, Council rejected the bid submitted by McLallen Construction, Inc. and subsequently hired DLS to complete the Penn Avenue project. a. The motion to reject the bid submitted by McLallen Construction, Inc. passed via 3-0-1 vote. 1. Lark was present and properly abstained from voting on the motion to reject McLallen Construction, Inc.'s bid. b. The motion to "go ahead" with DLS's proposal in relation to the Penn Avenue project passed via 3-0-1 vote. 1. Lark was present and properly abstained from the vote to hire DLS to complete the Penn Avenue project. 26. Although Lark abstained from the votes to reject the bid submitted by McLallen Construction, Inc., and to subsequently hire DLS to perform services on Penn Avenue, Lark, with Solicitor Tessone's knowledge, actively participated in discussions as a Member of Council in relation to DLS and the Penn Avenue project. a. Lark, with the knowledge of Solicitor Tessone, informed Council that DLS would not submit a bid but would perform the Penn Avenue project "hourly" and that DLS would clean up the mess from Pro -Care. 1. Lark estimated the cost of DLS's work to be less than $54,000.00. aa. The $54,000.00 referred to the estimated remaining grant monies. 27. Bulletin Document No. 16-2154, published on December 10, 2016, and effective on January 1, 2017, required boroughs and incorporated towns to publicly bid any contract over the base amount of $19,700.00. Lark, 20-008 Page 8 a. The Borough did not publicly bid the Penn Avenue project at the time the Borough hired DLS, although Lark estimated the work to be performed by DLS to be over the base amount of $19,700.00. b. DLS did not submit any bids and/or proposals in relation to the second attempt to complete the Penn Avenue project until after having been hired by the Borough. 28. In July 2017, DLS submitted two separate invoices, totaling $45,775.32, to the Borough for payment in relation to the Penn Avenue project, as detailed below: Invoice Date Invoice Number Date Range of Services Amount 07/01/2017 10304 June 7, 2017 through June 30, 2017 $13,007,12 07/25/2017 10308 July 12, 2017 through July 25, 2017 $32,768.20 TOTAL $45,775.32 a. DLS performed work on Penn Avenue to correct and complete the work previously performed by Pro -Care. 1. The work performed by DLS did not lower the vaults but made the vaults level with the ground for drainage. b. The total amount of the two invoices was less than $54,000.00. 1. The total amount invoiced by DLS in relation to the Penn Avenue project was greater than the 2017 public bid base amount of $19,700.00, but was $58,584,48 less than McLallen Construction, Inc.'s bid of $114,041.00. C. Borough General Fund Check No. 13584, dated July 20, 2017, in the amount of $13,007.12 was issued to DLS in relation to DLS Invoice No. 10304. 1. Check No. 13584 appeared on the August 15, 2017, Council meeting bill list. aa. The bill list presented to Council on August 15, 2017, was approved via a vote of 4-0. i. Lark was present and initially voted in favor of approving the bill list, not realizing the DLS invoice was on the list. bb. After the initial vote to approve the bills was taken, Lark questioned whether DLS's invoice was on the bill list which was voted on, and he was incorrectly informed by the Borough Secretary/Treasurer that the DLS invoice was not included. CC. Although the Borough Secretary/Treasurer had informed Lark otherwise, Check No. 13584 was in fact included on the bill list Lark, 20-008 Page 9 presented to Council during the August 15, 2017, legislative meeting. 29. To correct the mistake, Council Member Cynthia Gilkey subsequently made a specific request during the August 15, 2017, meeting for a motion to pay DLS's bill. a. Council Member Maleia James ("James") made the motion which was seconded by Council Member Ronald Preston. b. The motion carried via 3-0-1 vote. I. Lark was present for and properly abstained from the subsequent vote to approve payment to DLS in relation to Invoice No. 10304. 30. DLS holds Business Analysis Checking Account No. [account number redacted] at First National Bank. a. Donald Lark and John Lark Sr. are authorized signatories on DLS's bank account. 31. On or around July 24, 2017, DLS negotiated and deposited Check No. 13584 into First National Bank Business Analysis Checking Account No. [account number redacted]. 32. Borough Liquid Fuels Check No. 1121, dated August 16, 2017, in the amount of $32,768.20 was issued to DLS in relation to DLS Invoice No. 10308. a. Check No. 1121 appeared on the bill list presented at the September 19, 2017, Council meeting for approval. b. The bill list presented to Council on September 19, 2017, was unanimously approved via unanimous 6-0 vote. I. Lark was present and voted to approve the bill list which included Check No. 1121 payable to DLS. C. On or around August 21, 2017, DLS negotiated and deposited Check No. 1121 into First National Bank Business Analysis Checking Account No. [account number redacted]. 33. Lark received no pecuniary benefit or gain from contracts awarded to or work performed by his brother's company for the Borough and was motivated at all times by a desire to save the Borough money. 34. The Borough suffered no financial loss or harm as a result of any contract awarded to or work performed by DLS. Lark, 20-008 Page 10 THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO WORK DONALD LARK & SONS, INC. PERFORMED AND COMPLETED ON NINTH ALLEY. 35. Ninth Alley is a roadway located within the geographical boundaries of the Borough. a. Ninth Alley is located between State Route 318 (Main Street) and State Route 18 (Sharon Road). 36. Flooding issues and concerns involving Ninth Alley have existed in some capacity since as early as June 21, 2016. a. During the June 21, 2016, Council meeting, Council Member James presented the flooding problem on Ninth Alley and suggested having the Borough Engineer address the issue. 1. Discussion occurring at the meeting noted that the flooding problem on Ninth Alley had been reviewed in the past and was determined to be the responsibility of the property owners. b. Council Member Jaynes revisited the flooding problem on Ninth Alley during the July 19, 2016, Council meeting. 1. Council Member James presented her belief that the Borough was responsible for correcting the flooding problem under Act 167 (Storm Water Management Act). 2. Council subsequently decided to have Borough Engineer Fails examine the flooding problems on Ninth Alley. C. During the September 20, 2016, Council meeting, Borough resident Heidi Mariotti expressed concerns over the flooding problem on her property between State Route 18 and State Route 318 (aka Ninth Alley). 37. As a result of the discussions and the complaint received in relation to the flooding issues on Ninth Alley, it was determined during the October 18, 2016, Council meeting that Borough Engineer Fails "will submit a cost estimate for fixing the storm water problems" on Ninth Alley. 38. On or around February 17, 2017, Borough Engineer Fails sent a letter of transmittal to Council Member Thomas Hartshorn, which included a cost estimate for Ninth Alley as detailed below: Item No. Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total 1 15 inch HDPE storm sewer with select backfill 80 LF $50.00 $4,000.00 2 15 inch HDPE stone sewer with native backfill 80 LF $35.00 $2,800.00 Lark, 20-008 Page 11 3 2 x 3 storm catch basin 2 EA $2,000.00 $4,000.00 4 3 x 3 storm catch basin 1 EA $2,500.00 $2,500.00 5 Removal of existing storm manhole 1 EA $1,000.00 $1,000.00 6 Connection to existing catch basin 1 EA $1,000,00 $1,000.00 7 Surface Restoration 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 SUBTOTAL $16,800.00 Contingency @ 15% $2,500.00 Engineering Design and CM (not including inspection) $3,000.00 TOTAL $22,300.00 a. Borough Engineer Fails' cost estimate included the expected labor and materials needed to remedy the flooding issues. b. The cost estimate for Ninth Alley totaled $22,300.00. 39. Borough Engineer Fails' cost estimate and Ninth Alley are documented (in some capacity) in Council meeting minutes for meetings held on February 21, 2017, March 27, 2017, and April 11, 2017. a. Council discussed the Ninth Alley cost estimate during the February 21, 2017, Council meeting before tabling the issue. b. During the March 27, 2017, legislative meeting, Council decided the cost estimate ($22,300.00) was too high and wanted Borough Engineer Fails to see if costs could be lowered. C. No new information was presented at the April 11, 2017, legislative meeting in relation to scaling down the Ninth Alley project. 40. The last documented discussion by Council in relation to Ninth Alley, prior to the work being performed, occurred on May 17, 2017. a. On May 17, 2017, Lark and Council Member Thomas Hartshorn questioned Borough Engineer Fails if he came up with "a new number" for Ninth Alley. 41. On or around February 26, 2018, Lark approached John Lark Jr. at DLS's office in regard to the flooding on Ninth Alley. a. Lark and John Lark Jr. drove to Ninth Alley to discuss the scope of the work required to fix the flooding issues. 1. No other Council Members were present at said meeting. Lark, 20-008 Page 12 42. Lark again contacted his brother's company a few months later and gave verbal approval for DLS to complete the Ninth Alley project. a. DLS performed the work on Ninth Alley on June 26, 2018. b. Council did not formally approve the Ninth Alley project during any regular or special meeting prior to the work having been performed by DLS. 43. On or prior to July 5, 2018, Lark provided DLS Quote No. 8756 (undated) in the amount of $4,500.00 to Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis and requested that an emergency vote be taken to approve DLS to perform the work on Ninth Alley. a. Lark personally wrote notes on DLS Quote No. 8756 as detailed below: "Quote to repair Ninth Alley --- Call members of Council for a vote before the rain causes another flood in her basement. I abstain from voting." b. Lark submitted the quote and requested emergency approval for the work/repairs on Ninth Alley at least ten days after the work had been completed. 44. On July 5, 2018, at approximately 7:58 a.m., Borough Secretarty/Treasurer DeSantis emailed Council Members Cynthia Gilkey, Ronald Preston, Melissa Merchant -Calvert, and James, as well as Mayor Jerrod Palmer, in relation to Ninth Alley as follows: "Council and Mayor, President Robert Lark presented the office with a quote of $4,500.00 for Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. to repair Ninth Alley as soon as possible before the rain causes flooding. Please respond by email or phone ASAP with your vote." a. On July 5, 2018, at approximately 1:42 p.m., Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis emailed an update to Council Members Merchant -Calvert and James, as well as Mayor Palmer. "Council and Mayor, To Update: Ron Preston voted Yes. Cyndi Gilkey voted No." 45, Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis received responses from Council Members Merchant -Calvert and James and Mayor Palmer on July 5, 2018, and July 10, 2018. a. On July 5, 2018, at approximately 2:14 p.m., Council Member Merchant -Calvert emailed Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis as follows: "Sandy, Lark, 20-008 Page 13 At this point, I am going to say no. However, I believe it's something we should discuss at the work session, so that we all have a better idea of what's going on and why it's necessary." b. On July 5, 2018, at approximately 4:46 p.m., Council Member James emailed Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis. "My vote is yes for sure [sic] saves us a lot of money. We have discussed this need at length and it is well overdue for the borough to get this alley in compliance." C. On July 9, 2018, at approximately 7:32 a.m., Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis emailed Mayor Palmer and informed Mayor Palmer, "we now have two votes yes and two votes no. Mr. Lark must abstain. Therefore [sic] you have to break the tie vote." 1. On July 10, 2018, at approximately 12:44 p.m., Mayor Palmer responded, "I think we should discuss it during the work session [sic] it's not a [sic] going to rain between now and then." 46. Lark's request for an emergency vote to approve DLS to repair Ninth Alley failed via 2-3- 1 vote. a. There was no immediate emergency situation or exigent circumstance(s) on Ninth Alley to justify Council taking an emergency vote to approve DLS to perform the work on Ninth Alley. 1. DLS had already completed the services on Ninth Alley prior to initiation of the vote. 47. On July 9, 2018, Lark wrote a letter to Council Members Merchant -Calvert, Gilkey, and James and Mayor Palmer in relation to street improvements. a. Lark's letter stated the Borough had replaced six storm sewers during the summer on Chestnut Street (2), Dogwood Lane (1), Fair Street (1), and Garfield Street (2) in addition to having already added a storm sewer on Ninth Alley. b. Lark's letter documented his knowledge of the work DLS performed on Ninth Alley prior to Council's approval. 48. On July 10, 2018, at approximately 12:44 p.m., Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis responded to Mayor Palmer's tie -breaking vote. "Jerrod, I was informed yesterday that Donald Lark & Sons performed this project last week per Mr. Robert Lark and Mr. Ron Preston's authorization. Lark, 20-008 Page 14 You may want to speak to both [sic] Cyndi Gilkey, Melissa Calvert and Attorney Tesone on this subject." 49. The July 11, 2018, work session agenda documented the emergency vote for DLS's work on Ninth Alley as an item to be discussed. a. At the July 11, 2018, work session, Lark presented Council with a summary of activity and events in relation to Ninth Alley beginning as of winter 2016, including: 1. Borough Engineer Fails having presented a cost estimate over $22,300.00 in the spring of 2016. aa. Lark's summary/notes incorrectly documented the cost estimate as having been presented in spring 2016 instead of spring 2017. 2. Council having taken no action from the fall of 2016 until the spring of 2018. 3. Lark informing DLS in spring 2018 that the Borough would likely deal with Ninth Alley and noting his intention to have Council approve the work, as detailed below: "I intend to have Borough Council vote on the Storm Sewers on Garfield Street, Mill Street and Ninth (9th) Alley at the meeting on Tuesday, June 18th but forget [sic] to take such a vote!" 4. Lark documenting DLS having repaired Ninth Alley: "I am in Harrisburg for a meeting of the Horse Racing Commission; Lark and Sons, Inc. repair Ninth Alley!" aa. DLS performed services on Ninth Alley on June 26, 2018. bb. The State Horse Racing Commission held a legislative meeting on June 26, 2018. i. Lark was documented as being present at said legislative meeting. 50. During the July 17, 2018, Council meeting, Lark addressed Council in relation to Ninth Alley and told Council there was "a communication breakdown between approval of the project and work on the project for which he takes full responsibility for." a. Following Lark's comments, Council took the following action; Lark, 20-008 Page 15 • Council Member Preston motioned, and Council Member James seconded to approve the Ninth Alley storm sewer work and additional work on storm sewers on Garfield Street and Mill Street. + The motion to approve the work performed by DLS on Ninth Alley carried unanimously via 5-0 vote. • Lark was present and voted in favor of approving the work already completed by DLS on Ninth Alley. 51. DLS submitted Invoice No. 10373 dated July 27, 2018, to the Borough in relation to services DLS performed on Ninth Alley, as detailed below: Item Description Quantity Unit Price Amount Contract 91h ALLEY STORM DRAIN (quote #8756) 1.00 $4,500.00 $4,500.00 Subtotal $4,500.00 Sales Tax Total Invoice Amount $4,500.00 Payment/Credit Applied TOTAL $4,500.00 a. DLS performed the work on Ninth Alley on or around June 26, 2018. 52. Borough Road Tax Fund Check No. 1014, dated July 31, 2018, in the amount of $4,500.00 was issued to DLS in relation to DLS Invoice No. 10373. a. Check No. 1014 appeared on the bill list presented at the August 21, 2018, Council meeting for approval. b. The bill list presented to Council on August 21, 2018, was approved via unanimous 5-0 vote. 1. Lark was present and voted to approve the bill list which included Check No. 1014 payable to DLS. C. On or around August 3, 2018, DLS negotiated and deposited Check No. 1014 into First National Bank Business Analysis Checking Account No. [account number redacted]. Lark, 20-008 Page 16 1. Council previously approved the work DLS performed on Ninth Alley during the legislative meeting held on July 17, 2018. 53. Lark received no pecuniary gain or benefit from contracts awarded to or work performed by his brother's company for the Borough and was motivated at all times by a desire to save the Borough money. 54. The Borough suffered no financial loss or harm as a result of any contract awarded to or work performed by DLS. THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO ADDITIONAL BOROUGH PROJECTS WHICH DLS PERFORMED AND COMPLETED ON GARFIELD STREET, FAIR STREET, CHESTNUT STREET, AND DOGWOOD LANE. 55. One of Lark's goals when taking office as a Council Member was to improve the Borough's streets. a. Lark's goal was to complete "twenty years" of street improvements when he became President of Council. b. Lark issued memos to Council in 2018 highlighting various street improvements. 1. Some of those street improvement projects were completed by a business owned by Lark's brothers. 2. Lark participated in Borough actions to approve these projects. C. Lark's memorandum to Council, dated July 9, 2018, documented, in part, the following: "This is probably the most street improvements made at one time in the history of the Borough of West Middlesex, and it is this Borough Government that made it possible!" d. The street improvements referenced by Lark were completed by a company owned by Lark's brothers. 56. After assuming the Presidency of Council on January 2, 2018, Lark identified improvements to be made to multiple Borough streets including: • Garfield Street • Fair Street • Dogwood Lane • Chestnut Street Lark, 20-008 Page 17 57. Lark communicated with Borough employees and DLS (his brother's company) regarding 2018 Borough projects. a. As Council President, Lark requested representatives of the Borough to consult with DLS representatives regarding work to be performed on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street. 58. DLS submitted five quotes to the Borough, totaling $15,800.00, in relation to the Borough projects on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street, as summarized below: Quote Number Quote Date Material(s) Street(s) Amount 2232018 02/03/2018 Two 2 x 4 catch basins One 2 x 2 catch basin Garfield Street Fair Street $7,700.00 422018 04/02/2018 2 x 2 catch basin Dogwood Lane $2,500.00 41920181 04/19/2018 2 x 2 catch basin Chestnut Street (North) $2,500.00 41920182 04/19/2018 2 x 2 catch basin Chestnut Street (South) $2,500.00 41920183 04/19/2018 20 LF 12" Cross pipe with premium fill Chestnut Street (Cross Pipe) MOM TOTAL $15,800.00 a. Four of the five quotes submitted by DLS to the Borough related to installing catch basins on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street. b. The Borough did not obtain quotes from any other contractor and/or business in relation to said Borough projects. 59. Over the approximate time period of February 28, 2018, to June 18, 2018, DLS performed a minimum of three projects for the Borough which were not publicly discussed or voted on by Council during any legislative or special meeting. a. DLS replaced/installed storm sewers (aka catch basins) on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Chestnut Street, and Dogwood Lane. b. These projects were in addition to the Ninth Street Alley project authorized by Lark. 60. None of the projects for which DLS submitted quotes were discussed or voted on at a public meeting by Council. a. Borough Secretary/Treasurer DeSantis was requested by Lark, as Council President, to contact Council Members individually by telephone to obtain approval for the projects quoted by DLS. b. DeSantis contacted five Members of Council with three indicating approval of the projects. One Council Member did not respond. Lark, 20-008 Page 18 C. Although Lark asserted to DeSantis that he was abstaining from the vote, he used his public position to suggest the vendor and request Borough staff to obtain quotes from his brother's company. 61. DLS submitted five invoices to the Borough, totaling $15,800.00, in relation to the work DLS performed on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street, as summarized below: Invoice Number Invoice Date Street(s) Amount 10341 03/07/2018 Garfield Street Fair Street $7,700.00 10346 04/11/2018 Dogwood Lane $2,500.00 10363 06/25/2018 Chestnut Street (Cross Pipe) $600.00 10364 06/25/2018 Chestnut Street (North) $2,500.00 10365 06/25/2018 Chestnut Street (South) $2,500.00 TOTAL $15,800.00 a. The work performed on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street by DLS and subsequently invoiced to the Borough matched DLS's quotes for said work/projects. 62. DLS received three checks written from the Borough's FNB Road Tax fund, totaling $15,800.00, for the work DLS performed on Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street, as detailed below: Check Date Check Number 'mount Deposit Date Legislative Meeting Date Vote to Approve Bills Lark Present Lark's Vote 03/14/2018 1004 $7,700.00 03/23/2018 04/17/2018 5-0 Yes Yes 04/09/2018 1005 $2,500.00 04/13/2018 04/17/2018 5-0 Yes Yes 07/18/2018 1011 $5,600.00 07/19/2018 08/21/2018 5-0 Yes Yes TOTAL $15,800.06 a. Lark was present and voted to approve bill lists presented to Council that documented the three Borough Road Tax fund checks payable to DLS. b. DLS deposited all three Borough Road Tax fund checks into its First National Bank Business Analysis Checking Account No. [account number redacted]. 63. Lark received no pecuniary gain or benefit from contracts awarded to or work performed by his brother's company for the Borough and was motivated at all times by a desire to save the Borough money. 64. The Borough suffered no financial loss or harm as a result of any contract awarded to or work performed by DLS. Lark, 20-008 Page 19 THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS RELATE TO LARK HAVING FAILED TO FILE STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FORMS FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2016 AND 2017 WITH THE BOROUGH AND HAVING FILED DEFICIENT STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INTERESTS FORMS FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2015 AND 2018. 65. Statement of Financial Interests ("SFI") forms are required to be annually filed by all public officials with the governing authority of the political subdivision within which they are appointed or elected as mandated by 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a). a. SFI forms are required to be filed by no later than May I st of each year that a public official holds public office. b. SFI forms require filers to report specified financial information pertaining to the preceding calendar year. 66. Lark was required to file SFIs by May 1" annually in his position as a Member of Council for calendar years 2015 through 2019. 67. Information to be disclosed on SFIs filed by public officials and public employees is specified by 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105. a. Section 1105(a) states, in part, all information requested on the SFI shall be provided to the best of the knowledge, information and belief of the person requested to file and shall be signed under oath or equivalent affirmation. b. Section 1105(b)(1) through Section 1105(b)(I0) identify specific information to be disclosed as well as exceptions to disclosure requirements when applicable. I . Section 1105(b)(1) mandates disclosure of the following on SFIs filed: "Name, address and public position." 2. Section 1105(b)(4) mandates, in part, disclosure of the following on SFIs filed: "The name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in excess of $6,500 and the interest rate thereon...." 68. On March 10, 2020, an SFI compliance review was conducted for the Borough at the Borough's Municipal Building, located at 25 North Street, West Middlesex, Pennsylvania 16159. a. All of Lark's SFI forms on file with the Borough were obtained by the Investigative Division during the review. 69. Lark filed SFI forms for calendar years 2015 through 2019 as follows: Lark, 20-008 Page 20 70 71 72. Date Filed Calendar Year 02/29/2016 2015 Non -filer 2016 Non -filer 2017 03/11/2019 2018 04/27/2020 2019 Lark failed to file SFI forms for calendar years 2016 and 2017 with the Borough pursuant to 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a). Lark incorrectly identified the calendar year in Block 07 ("YEAR") on his SFI form for calendar year 2015. a. Lark disclosed calendar year 2016 in Block 07 ("YEAR") on his calendar year 2015 SFI form. Lark failed to disclose his position as a Commissioner with the State Horse Racing Commission on his SFI form filed for calendar year 2018. a. Lark has served on the State Horse Racing Commission since at least September 26, 2016. b. Lark disclosed only his position as a Member of Council in Block 04 ("PUBLIC POSITION OR PUBLIC OFFICE") and Block 05 ("GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY"), respectively. 73. Lark failed to disclose the interest rates held with creditors owed in excess of $6,500 in conjunction with creditors of which Lark reported on his SFI forms filed for calendar years 2015, 2018, and 2019. a. Lark reported creditors including "First National Bank of Pennsylvania" and "Pittsburgh National Bank" on his 2015 calendar year SFI. 1. Lark did not identify the interest rates assigned by any of the creditors. b. Lark reported creditors including "First National Bank" and "PNC National Bank" on his 2018 calendar year SFI. 1. Lark did not identify the interest rates assigned by any of the creditors. 74. As a Member of the Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission, Lark filed SFIs with the State Ethics Commission for the following years: a. Calendar Year Date Filed 2016* 05/08/17 2016 12/14/17 (Amended) Lark, 20-008 Page 21 2017 04/27/ 18 2018 03/26/19 2019 02/24/20 *This filing was determined to contain numerous deficiencies resulting in deficient notices being sent to Lark, eventually resulting in the amended filing on December 14, 2017. b. Lark's filings with the State Ethics Commission disclosed his public position as a Member of Council. 111. DISCUSSION: As a Member of Council for West Middlesex Borough ("Borough"), Mercer County, Pennsylvania, from January 4, 2016, to the present, Respondent Robert Lark, also referred to herein as "Respondent," "Respondent Lark," and "Lark," has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et sue. The allegations are that Lark violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), 1104(d), 1 I05(b)(1), and 1105(b)(4) of the Ethics Act when he utilized the authority of his public position for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family, and/or a business with which a member of his immediate family is associated, namely Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. ("DLS"), when he participated in actions and decisions of Council to authorize repairs to Borough streets and alleys to be completed by DLS; when he directed DLS to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council; when he participated in actions of Council to approve issuance of payments to DLS; and when he failed to file calendar year 2016 and 2017 Statements of Financial Interests ("SFIs") with the Borough, filed deficient SFIs for calendar years 2015 and 2018 when he failed to identify all public positions held and failed to identify an interest rate regarding disclosures of creditors, and failed to identify the proper filing year for his SFI for calendar year 2015. Per the Consent Agreement, the Investigative Division has exercised its prosecutorial discretion to nolle pros the alleged violations of Sections 1104(d), I I05(b)(1), and 1105(b)(4) of the Ethics Act as well as the portion of the allegations pertaining to Lark's participation in actions of Council to approve issuance of payments to DLS. We therefore need not address those particular allegations. Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest: § 1103. Restricted activities (a) Conflict of interest. --No public official or public employee shall engage in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a). Lark, 20-008 Page 22 The term "conflict of interest" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows: § 1102. Definitions "Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. The term does not include an action having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. Subject to the statutory exclusions to the Ethics Act's definition of the term "conflict" or "conflict of interest," 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102, pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official/public employee is prohibited from using the authority of public office/employment or confidential information received by holding such a public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public official/public employee himself, any member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is associated. Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides that each public official/public employee must file an SF1 for the preceding calendar year, each year that he holds the position and the year after he leaves it. As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are set forth above as the Findings of this Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein. Lark has served as a Member of Council from January 4, 2016, through the present. Lark served as President of Council from January 2, 2018, to January 2, 2020. The Borough is governed by a five -Member Council and a Mayor. DLS is a privately -owned entity that provides excavating, grading, and trucking services. Donald Lark Jr., who is Lark's brother, has owned DLS since at least November 30, 1990. Multiple members of Lark's immediate family have been associated with the operation of DLS since at least January 2017. On March 22, 2016, Council voted to award a bid for a project on Penn Avenue to Pro - Care Landscaping & Construction ("Pro -Care"). 1n or about May 2016, Pro -Care began working i,ark, 20-008 Page 23 on the Penn Avenue project. As a result of Pro-Care's failure to adhere to construction specifications, the Borough terminated Pro-Care's services in December 2016. In May 2017, the Borough sought bids for the completion of the Penn Avenue project through an informal bid process. DLS expressed interest in completing the Penn Avenue project but did not submit a bid to complete the project. McLallen Construction, Inc. ("McLallen") was the only contractor that submitted a bid to complete the Penn Avenue project. McLallen's bid totaled $104,360.00, while the balance of a grant for the Penn Avenue project totaled $54,000.00. At a meeting of Council on May 30, 2017, Council and the Borough Engineer discussed the Penn Avenue project grant balance. Lark questioned if it was possible to reexamine the scope of the Penn Avenue project and redesign the project to make it more affordable. Council subsequently voted unanimously to table McLallen's bid to complete the Penn Avenue project. On May 31, 2017, the Borough Solicitor emailed a copy of McLallen's bid to DLS and asked DLS to review the bid. On or around June 5, 2017, Lark, the Borough Solicitor, and the Borough Engineer met with representatives of DLS to discuss the Penn Avenue project. On June 13, 2017, Council voted to reject McLallen's bid and then voted to hire DLS to complete the Penn Avenue project. Although Lark abstained from both votes, he actively participated in discussions related to DLS and the Penn Avenue project. Lark informed Council that DLS would not submit a bid but would perform the Penn Avenue project "hourly," and he estimated that DLS's work would cost less than $54,000.00. In July 2017, DLS submitted two invoices totaling $45,775.32 to the Borough for payment for work performed on the Penn Avenue project. The Borough subsequently issued two checks totaling $45,775.32 to DLS. Since as early as June 2016, the Borough had flooding issues involving Ninth Alley, a roadway located in the Borough. In February 2017, the Borough Engineer estimated that the materials and labor needed to remedy the Ninth Alley flooding issues would cost $22,300.00. Council subsequently decided that the cost estimate was too high and requested the Borough Engineer to see if the cost could be lowered. On or around February 26, 2018, Lark approached John Lark Jr., who is Lark's nephew and DLS's Project Manager, with regard to the flooding on Ninth Alley. Lark and John Lark Jr. drove to Ninth Alley to discuss the scope of the work required to fix the flooding issues. Lark contacted DLS a few months later and gave verbal approval for DLS to complete the Ninth Alley project. DLS performed repair work on Ninth Ailey on June 26, 2018. Council did not formally approve the Ninth Alley repair work prior to DLS's performance of the work. On or about July 5, 2018, Lark provided the Borough Secretary/Treasurer with a quote in the amount of $4,500.00 from DLS for the Ninth Alley repair work. Even though the repair work had already been completed, Lark requested that the Borough Secretary/Treasurer contact the other Council Members for an emergency vote to approve DLS to perform the work. Lark's request for an Lark, 20-008 Page 24 emergency vote to approve DLS to repair Ninth Alley failed via a vote of 2-3, with Lark abstaining from the vote. During a Council meeting held on July 17, 2018, Lark told Council that with respect to Ninth Alley, there was "a communication breakdown between approval of the project and work on the project" for which he took full responsibility. Lark then participated in a unanimous vote of Council that approved the work performed on Ninth Alley. The Borough subsequently issued a check in the amount of $4,500.00 to DLS for the work performed on Ninth Alley. One of Lark's goals as a Council Member was to improve the Borough's streets. After becoming Council President on January 2, 2018, Lark identified improvements to be made to multiple Borough streets, including Garfield Street, Fair Street, Dogwood Lane, and Chestnut Street (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Four Streets"). As Council President, Lark asked Borough representatives to consult with DLS representatives and obtain quotes regarding work to be performed on the Four Streets. DLS submitted five quotes totaling $15,800.00 to the Borough for projects involving the Four Streets. None of the projects for which DLS submitted quotes were discussed or voted on by Council at a public meeting. At Lark's request, the Borough Secretary/Treasurer contacted the other Council Members individually by telephone to obtain their approval for the projects. Between February 28, 2018, and June 18, 2018, DLS performed work for the Borough on projects involving the Four Streets. The Borough paid DLS $15,800.00 for the work performed on the projects. As a Council Member, Lark is annually required to file an SFI by May 1 containing information for the prior calendar year. Lark failed to file SFIs for calendar years 2016 and 2017 with the Borough. 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: 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 Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), occurred in relation to Lark's participation in Borough Council discussions that led to the private pecuniary benefit of DLS and when he directed DLS to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Borough Council. Lark, 20-008 Page 25 b. That two violations of Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred when Lark failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2016 and 2017 calendar years. C. The Investigative Division elects to nolle prosse the remaining allegations. 4. Lark agrees to make payment in the amount of $500.00 in settlement of this matter payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. a. The payment of $500.00 reflects a civil penalty. $250.00 for each year he failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests. b. Lark received no private pecuniary benefit or gain and by this agreement, the Investigative Division will not seek disgorgement of public funds pursuant to I I04(d). 5. To the extent that he has not already done so, Lark agrees to file complete and accurate amended Statements of Financial Interests with the West Middlesex Borough, Mercer County, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, for calendar years 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. 6. Lark agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the West Middlesex Borough, Mercer County representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. 7. The Investigative Division will recommend that the State Ethics Commission take no further action in this matter; and make no specific recommendations to any law enforcement or other authority to take action in this matter. Such, however, does not prohibit the Commission from initiating appropriate enforcement actions in the event of Respondent's failure to comply with this agreement or the Commission's order or cooperating with any other authority who may so choose to review this matter further. Consent Agreement, at 1-2. Lark, 20-008 Page 26 We accept the recommendation of the parties for a finding that a violation of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred in relation to Lark's participation in Council discussions that led to the private pecuniary benefit of DLS, and when he directed DLS to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council. DLS is a business with which Lark's brother, Donald Lark Jr., is associated in his capacity as the owner. Lark used the authority of his public office as a Council Member in matters involving DLS: (1) when he met with representatives of DLS to discuss the Penn Avenue project on or around June 5, 2017, and when he actively participated in discussions related to DLS and the Penn Avenue project; (2) when he approached DLS's Project Manager and discussed the scope of the work required to fix flooding on Ninth Alley on or around February 26, 2018, and when he contacted DLS a few months later and gave verbal approval for DLS to complete the Ninth Ailey project even though Council had not yet approved the project; and (3) when he asked Borough representatives to consult with DLS representatives and obtain quotes regarding work to be performed on "the Four Streets", The Borough ultimately paid DLS the amounts of $45,775.32, $4,500.00, and $15,800.00 for the work performed on the Penn Avenue project, the Ninth Alley project, and "the Four Streets" projects, respectively, Based upon the Stipulated Findings and Consent Agreement, we hold that Lark violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to his participation in Council discussions that led to the private pecuniary benefit of DLS, and when he directed DLS to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council. We agree with the parties, and we hold, that two violations of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1 I04(a), occurred when Lark failed to file SFIs for the 2016 and 2017 calendar years with the Borough. As part of the Consent Agreement, Lark has agreed to make payment to the Commonwealth in the amount of $500.00—representing a civil penalty for the delinquent SFIs for calendar years 2016 and 2017—within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. Lark agrees to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. To the extent he has not already done so, Lark has agreed to file complete and accurate SFIs/amended SFIs for calendar years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 with the Borough, through this Commission, within thirty (30) days of the issuance of the final adjudication in this matter. We agree that the aforesaid recommendations are appropriate, including the recommendation that Lark file complete and accurate SFIs/amended SFIs for calendar years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018, notwithstanding the nolle pros as to the allegations regarding Lark's SFIs for calendar years 2015 and 2018. Lark, 20-008 Page 27 Accordingly, per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Lark is directed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to this Commission by no later than the thirtieth (30'h) day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order. Lark is directed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. To the extent he has not already done so, Lark is directed to file complete and accurate SFIs/amended SFIs for calendar years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 with the Borough, through this Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (30"') day after the mailing date of this adjudication and Order. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: As a Member of Council for West Middlesex Borough ("Borough"), Mercer County, Pennsylvania, from January 4, 2016, to the present, Respondent Robert Lark ("Lark") has been a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seMt . 2. Lark violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to his participation in Council discussions that led to the private pecuniary benefit of Donald Lark & Sons, Inc., and when he directed Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council. 3. Two violations of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred when Lark failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 2016 and 2017 calendar years with the Borough. In Re: Robert Lark, File Docket: 20-008 Respondent Date Decided: 6/23/21 Date Mailed: 6/28/21 ORDER NO. 1787 Robert Lark ("Lark"), as a Member of Council for West Middlesex Borough ("Borough"), Mercer County, Pennsylvania, violated Section 1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ("Ethics Act"), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), in relation to his participation in Council discussions that led to the private pecuniary benefit of Donald Lark & Sons, Inc., and when he directed Donald Lark & Sons, Inc. to perform repairs to Borough streets and alleys prior to approval of Council. 2. Two violations of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), occurred when Lark failed to file Statements of Financial Interests ("SFIs") for the 2016 and 2017 calendar years with the Borough. 3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Lark is directed to make payment in the amount of $500.00 payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission by no later than the thirtieth (301h) day after the mailing date of this Order. 4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Lark is directed to not accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the Borough representing a full or partial reimbursement of the amount paid in settlement of this matter. 5. To the extent he has not already done so, Lark is directed to file complete and accurate SFIs/amended SFIs for calendar years 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018 with the Borough, through the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission, by no later than the thirtieth (301h) day after the mailing date of this Order. 6. Compliance with Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 of this Order will result in the closing of this case with no further action by this Commission. a. Non-compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Nicholas A. Colafella, VWair