In In Re Nomination Petition of Timothy J. Carroll, 586 Pa. 624, 896 A.2d 566 (2006), the court was faced with the issue of whether Carroll's failure to disclose his unpaid public position as a board member and Assistant Secretary of the Dallas Area Municipal Authority (DAMA) and his uncompensated presidency of the non-profit organization "Timothy J. Carroll's Mayors Club of Dallas Borough," was fatal to his nomination petition under Section 1104(b) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa. C.S. 1104(b). After noting that the Ethics Act "is not shrouded in mystery" and that, "the substantive focus of this declaration is on financial interests, and particularly, how complete disclosure of financial interests may further the 'public trust,' and 'strengthen the faith and confidence of the people' in their government," Carroll, 586 Pa. at 637-38, 896 A.2d at 573-74, our Supreme Court concluded that, "the Ethics Act did not require Carroll to disclose his 'interest' in the non-profit Mayors Club." Id. at 640, 896 A.2d at 575. Although acknowledging that there were two possible constructs of the modifying phrase "organized for profit" in the definition of "business" in Section 1102, the court agreed that Carroll's reading of the statute to exclude non-profits from the definition of "business" was "in keeping with the purpose of the legislation announced in Section 1101.1" and that it was clear that this definition "intends to cover only for-profit entities." Id. at 638, 639 n.10, 640, 896 A.2d at 574 n.10, 575.