SMETHPORT — A former municipal employee who pleaded guilty earlier this month to stealing money from the City of Bradford will serve a jail term and pay restitution of nearly $10,000.
Bonita J. Hillyard, 66, of Bradford, was sentenced Thursday in McKean County Court before President Judge John Pavlock. She had been working for the city as a payroll clerk at the time of the thefts.
Hillyard will serve 30 day to 23½ months in McKean County Jail on one count, and two 23½-month terms of probation on two different counts. She will serve the probation terms at the same time as the jail term.
Hillyard was also ordered to complete 250 hours of community service, undergo a mental health evaluation and write a letter of apology to the city. She is eligible for work release.
Her attorney, James Miller, had a check on Thursday for the full amount of restitution — $9,749.61 — as well as for the estimated cost of supervision fees. Miller noted that Hillyard’s husband had to take money out of his IRA to pay back the city and county.
“She wants to make this right,” Miller said.
Several people wrote letters on Hillyard’s behalf, said Pavlock. He noted that Bradford Mayor Tom Riel sent a letter with his thoughts on the matter, as well, but Pavlock did not describe the contents of the letter.
In her comments prior to sentencing, Assistant District Attorney Ashley Shade noted that Hillyard was charged with taking the $9,749.61, and reports indicating she may have taken more than $100,000 were not accurate.
At the time of her arrest, city officials reported their belief that she had been stealing since at least 2010 and that the amount she took was allegedly far more than the amount for which she was convicted of taking.
Hillyard pleaded guilty Aug. 9 to allegations that between Jan. 1 and July 10 in 2017, she claimed that she worked 387 hours of overtime that she did not work, taking a total of $9,749.61 from the city’s general fund.
She entered the plea to charges of theft by deception and tampering with public records, both third-degree felonies, and misapplication of entrusted property and property of government or financial institutions, a second-degree misdemeanor.
Shade said the plea agreement would have been much different if it was for an amount over $100,000.
Speaking on Hillyard’s behalf, Miller said, “My client is elderly. She had medical issues.” He noted that she has had recent surgeries, which is why the case has taken as long as it has to be resolved.
Charges were filed July 13, 2017.
Miller asked if Pavlock would consider house arrest. He added that it is his belief the city intends for Hillyard to lose her pension under the Pension Forfeiture Act, so she will be punished in that way, too.
“She’s trying to make it right,” said Miller. “I think her sincerity will be shown by what she tells the court.” He added that she has never been in trouble before, and she is “sincerely remorseful.”
Hillyard then attempted to read a statement she had prepared, but she started crying, and Pavlock suggested that Miller read it instead.
Reading the statement, Miller said she wanted to apologize to the county, the district attorney and to the city.
“She asked for God to forgive her,” he said.
Miller said, “She wants to do whatever she can do to help others in the community,” and added she “wants a sentence that will allow her to help people.”
Pavlock made a comparison between Hillyard’s case and a case in which someone was charged with stealing money from a found wallet.
While both were theft cases, Hillyard’s involved trust, Pavlock said.
“It was the community saying, ‘here are funds; here’s our wallet,’” Pavlock said, explaining that the difference between stealing a found wallet and stealing from one’s employer is a matter of trust. “No only did money come out of the (city’s) wallet once, but it came out many, many times.”
The judge noted that the stolen money belonged to taxpayers.
Pavlock said he did some math — which he hoped was accurate — to put the $9,749.61 theft into perspective.
According to his calculation, that equates to 387 hours of overtime, 9.675 weeks of overtime or 48.375 days of overtime.
“In a way, the 48 days of incarceration would be justified,” Pavlock said.
However, he added that he also had to consider factors such as remorse, rehabilitation, her record, the guideline range, the restitution and the message her sentence sends to the public.
