Former state Rep. Frank LaGrotta, who represented the 10th Legislative District, which includes a part of Butler County, won't lose his state pension, despite pleading guilty to two felony conflict-of-interest charges. Fortunately for him, the charges don't fall under the list of 23 crimes that would have required pension forfeiture.

But it should concern state taxpayers that someone who purportedly was representing their best interests in a position of public trust, but instead was using their tax dollars improperly, should still be eligible for annual payments involving — yes — more of their tax dollars.

LaGrotta, 49, who is eligible for a $48,000 annual pension, will collect about $36,000 a year because of the payment options he selected. In addition, he'll collect a $102,000 lump sum when he reaches age 59.

Many law-abiding state residents whose pensions are, or will be, nowhere near as generous as LaGrotta's — despite loyal, honest, dedicated work over many years — are no doubt still shaking their heads over what they see as the former lawmaker's good fortune despite his crime.

Some will say LaGrotta is being rewarded for his dishonesty and, unfortunately, that is not an unfair assessment.

LaGrotta strayed from acting in the taxpayers' best interests when he placed relatives in state jobs that reaped them thousands of dollars for little or no work. He was sentenced to six months of house arrest, probation and community service and was ordered to pay a fine and restitution.

The "LaGrotta Story" is an example of a well-meaning, dedicated individual, when he first was elected, becoming arrogant because of his self-perceived insulation from defeat.

He didn't anticipate the impact one issue could have on his legislative career, that being the 2005 legislative pay-raise fiasco and his support of the excessive raises. Meanwhile, he obviously felt that the little- or no-work jobs for which his relatives were paid were "small potatoes" — and that nobody would notice or care.

He was wrong.

Like LaGrotta's crime, the current "Bonusgate" grand jury investigation going on in Harrisburg portends troubling findings and realizations about people in whom thousands of state residents have placed their trust. It is to be hoped that the investigation, even if it results in no actual criminal charges, will help to end the "we can do as we please" attitude that pervades the state capital.

The question, if criminal charges do emerge from that probe, is whether the charges will, like in LaGrotta's case, have no effect on the taxpayers' pension obligations to the individuals.

Too often the taxpayers lose, regardless of how the case shakes out. As the LaGrotta case suggests, perhaps part of the solution for the future lies in fewer and less-generous fringe benefits for lawmakers.

That would reduce the incentive for lawmakers to want to stick around Harrisburg for so long, defusing some of the potential for the kind of arrogance to which LaGrotta fell victim — an arrogance that ultimately destroyed the good reputation he had built during his years in the legislature.