The Pennsylvania Civil Service Commission has ruled that Perry O’Malley gets back his job as executive director of the Butler County Housing and Redevelopment Authority.

The commission on July 26 issued its ruling reinstating O’Malley to the post, citing a lack of evidence for his termination in March 2015.

The authority fired O’Malley alleging he abused travel and sick time, used authority resources for private business and neglected his duties, which resulted in financial instability, a failed project and poor employee morale.

O’Malley appealed the termination, citing age discrimination.

The commission determined the most egregious allegations — his private business endeavors were a conflict of interest, he abused travel and travel expenses, and his neglect of duties resulting in uncollectible debts and failed projects — were unsubstantiated.

But that’s not to say O’Malley did no wrong. The commission did rule that a suspension was warranted because his personal use of resources and abuse of sick time violated the employee handbook while his time out of the office had a negative impact on subordinates’ job performance.

For those keeping score, the authority owes O’Malley about $160,000 in back pay, the pro-rated portion of his $128,000 annual salary from the time of his firing to present, minus the one month of unpaid suspension.

The ruling raises four questions:

n Does O’Malley want his old job back? He says he does; at least he’s asked for it. The request likely is a legal hoop O’Malley must jump through to claim any back pay he is owed.

n Does the authority board, want him back? That’s highly unlikely since the ruling only confounds its initial allegations that its CEO was taking advantage of its oversight. The board’s official position for now is no comment. Attorney Andrew Menchyk says it’s a confidential personnel matter.

n What’s best for low-income housing in Butler County? Put aside the emotions and egos and consider O’Malley’s accomplishments and shortcomings in their entirety. Since his 1992 hiring, O’Malley has grown the Housing Authority more than 300 percent in dwelling units, from 800 to 2,500, and nearly 400 percent in annual budget, from $4 million to $15 million.

This should be the question that matters. But in the end it likely won’t matter a all. The fourth question is the one that ultimately will matter:

n How big or small will O’Malley’s severance package be? O’Malley’s lawyer, Paul Mazeski, says the authority won’t let his client go back to work, and they won’t force the authority to bring O’Malley back as long as he receives his salary.

It will play out like a chess match. The authority board at a meeting later this week is likely to direct Menchyk to file an appeal in state court.

O’Malley will file a cross appeal. The courts will set a deadline for the parties to settle their differences.

The negotiations will be straightforward with a focus on minor details, most likely having to do with the 30-dady suspension. It will be the little details that offer both sides a chance to perserve small dignities in an otherwise undignified and painful process.

And maybe the answer to the fourth question also answers the third: a settlement is in the program’s best interest. Ultimately it’s difficult for any board of directors to lay blame on an executive they’ve entrusted with their program for nearly a quarter century.