ShareThis Page

Bullskin Township officials ordered to repay legal expenses

| Tuesday, Nov. 29, 2016, 11:00 p.m.

The state Ethics Commission on Tuesday ordered Fayette County officials to repay taxpayers for use of a publicly funded lawyer to defend allegations of ethics violations two years ago.

Bullskin Township supervisors Walter Wiltrout and Thomas Keefer, along with former Supervisor William H. Geary, must each pay $2,610 to cover legal expenses associated with a complaint filed against them in 2014 involving allegations they received an improper vehicle allowance from the township, the commission ruled.

The supervisors settled the case and agreed to repay $3,000 for use of township vehicles as well as $1,000 to the ethics commission to cover investigation costs.

The settlement did not require the supervisors to admit any wrongdoing.

Township solicitor Donald J. McCue represented the supervisors during the investigation.

The commission determined public officials cannot use taxpayer money to defend themselves against alleged violations, Executive Director Robert Caruso said.

“For at least 30 years, the commission has said that if you're investigated for a potential violation and make the decision to defend yourself, you cannot use public funds for that defense,” Caruso said.

McCue on Tuesday declined to say whether the supervisors will appeal the commission's order.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at 724-830-6293 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.