Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout024-S BrinjacSTATE ETHICS COMMISSION 309 FINANCE BUILDING P.O. BOX 11470 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470 TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610 IN RE: JOHN M. BRINJAC : File Docket: 92 -010 -P : Date Decided: June 23, 1292 Respondent : Date Mailed: June 29, 1992 Before: James M. Howley, Chair Daneen E. Reese, Vice Chair Dennis C. Harrington Austin M. Lee Allan M. Kluger The State Ethics Commission received information regarding possible violation(s) of Section 4 and /or Section 5 of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), Act 9 of 1989, 65 P.S. S401 et sec. Written Notice was mailed to Respondent in accordance with Section (7)(5) of the Ethics Law, as to which there was no response. A Notice and Order to Show Cause was issued and served upon Respondent. An Answer and Supplemental Answer were filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. This adjudication of the Commission is hereby issued, which sets forth Findings of Fact, Discussion, Conclusions of Law and Order. This Adjudication is final and is a public document. Reconsideration may be requested. A request for reconsideration, however, does not affect the finality of this adjudication. A reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within fifteen days of issuance and must include a detailed explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code 52.38. John M. Brinjac June 29, 1992 Page 2 I. UNDXNGS: 1. Respondent John M. Brinjac is an adult individual who resides or maintains a mailing address at 67 South Terrace, Wormleysburg, Pennsylvania 17043. 2. Respondent is now and at all times relevant to these proceedings has been a Member of the State Registration Board for Professional Engineers. (a) Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1990. (b) Respondent admits that he is subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. 3. Respondent did not file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration on or before May 1, 1991. (a) Respondent has not specifically denied his failure to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990. 4. A Notice letter dated. June 18, 1991 was served upon Respondent by this Commission. The said Notice letter stated in detail the specific allegations against. Respondent concerning the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 and the penalties for failure to file or for filing a deficient Statement of Financial Interests. The said Notice letter provided Respondent an opportunity to avoid the institution of these civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate and complete Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Notice letter. (a) Respondent does not specifically deny service of the June 18, 1991 Notice letter upon him. (b) Respondent avers that he filed a form with the Governor's Office of Administration in response to the June 18, 1991 Notice letter from this Commission. (c) Respondent received the June 18, 1991 Notice letter served upon him by this Commission. 5. Respondent did not file a Statement of Financial Interests, as required by the Ethics Law, with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration for calendar year 1990 within fourteen days of the date of the said Notice John K. Brinjac June 29, 1992 Page 3 letter. (a) In his initial Answer to the Order to Show Cause, Respondent denies that he failed to provide full financial disclosure as required by Pennsylvania law, alleging that in response to the Commission's Notice letter of June 18, 1991 he did file a Statement of Financial Interests with the Governor's Office of Administration and was unaware that the form was required to be filed with this Commission as well. (b) In his Supplemental Answer to the Order to Show Cause, Respondent states that upon further inquiry, his failure to file the appropriate Statement of Financial Interests with the State Ethics Commission was due to his confusion regarding the Code of Conduct filing required by the Governor's .Office of Administration. Respondent states that it was the Code of Conduct filing which was satisfied in June of 1991 in response to this Commission's letter of June 18, 1991, whereby Respondent believed he had satisfied the disclosures required of him by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Respondent states that he was unaware of the difference between the Code of Conduct filing and the Statement of Financial Interests filing required to be filed with this Commission. (c) Respondent states that in response to the Order to Show Cause of March 16, 1992, Respondent has filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Secretary of Administration in a prompt and good faith effort to resolve his disclosures with the Commonwealth. 6. Respondent states that a civil penalty should not be assessed against him. (a) In his initial Answer to the Order to Show Cause, Respondent denied a violation as to calendar year 1990 and denied that he would be subject to a civil penalty of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars for such violation. (b) In his Supplemental Answer to the Order to Show Cause, Respondent has acknowledged his failure to file the appropriate Statement of Financial Interests with this Commission due to his confusion regarding a different filing requirement, the Code of Conduct filing required by the Governor's Office of Administration, but avers that he has now filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 in a prompt and good faith effort to resolve his disclosures with the Commonwealth, John M. Brinjac June 29, 1992 Page 4 providing full financial disclosure to this that he should �not i be for calendar year 1990, assessed a civil penalty. (c) Respondent alleges the following as mitigating circumstances: his filing with the Governor's Office of Administration in response he to fact tha Commission's wasnot letter of June 18, aware of the dual filing requirement for the Statement hof Financial Interests; that upon further inquiry, s filing in response to the June 1991 Notice G etter wa t Code of Conduct form required by Office of Administration b between the Code was t of u Conduct unaware of the difference irt filing and the Statement of Financial Interests requ to be filed with this Commission; and that he has = filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year with this Commission and the Secretary of Administration in response to the Order to Show Cause and in a prompt and good faith effort to full financial disclosure the Commonwealth, providing ull 7. As a matter of public record, Respondent fil 990State Statement Financial Interests for calendar year e, which Commission after he received the � Order d to Show A April 10, 1992 and is Statement of Financial In was received by this Commission on April 13, 1992. II. 010 Respondent is now and at the State Registration Board for proceedings has been a Member of t h Professional Engineers. Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1990. As a Member of the State Registration blicof f icial as for term n is Engineers " , Respondent is a p Ethics Law ( "Ethics defined under the Public Official and Employee Law"), 65 P.S. §401, et sea., and as such, Respondent is subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law, Respondent was required to file a Statement of Financial t 90 with the State ding financial disclosure for calendar year Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration by May 1, 1991. 65 P.S. § §404,405. Section 9(f) of the Ethics Law provides as follows: (f) In addition to any other civil remedy or John X. Brinjac June 29, 1992 Page 5 criminal penalty provided for in this act, the commission may, after notice has been served in accordance with section 7(5) and upon a majority vote of its members, levy a civil penalty upon any person subject to this act who fails to file a statement of financial interests in a timely manner or who files a deficient statement of financial interests, at a rate of not more than $25 for each day such statement remains delinquent or deficient. The maximum penalty payable under this paragraph is $250. 65 P.S. 5409(f). An application of Section 9(f) to this case establishes that this Commission has the discretion to levy a maximum civil penalty against the Respondent for the delinquent Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990. Factually, Respondent failed to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration, which constitutes a failure to comply with Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Section 7(5) of the Ethics Law, a Notice letter dated June 18, 1991 was issued to Respondent notifying Respondent in detail of the specific allegations against Respondent concerning the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 and the penalties for failure to file or for filing a deficient Statement of Financial Interests. The service of a Notice letter in accordance with Section 7(5) is a prerequisite to the levying of a civil penalty under Section 9(f) of the Ethics Law. 65 P.S. §409(f). This prerequisite has been met in this case. Respondent has not specifically denied receiving the June 18, 1991 Notice letter and in fact has averred that he acted in response to that Notice letter by filing a Code of Conduct form with the Governor's Office of Administration. However, upon being notified of the above transgression, Respondent did not remedy the failure to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with this Commission, although given fourteen days from the date of the aforesaid Notice letter in which to do so. This Commission then instituted formal proceedings against Respondent by issuing an Order to Show Cause, ordering Respondent to show cause why a civil penalty should not be levied against Respondent. Respondent's Answer to the Order to Show Cause, as supplemented by his Supplemental Answer, fails to show cause why a civil penalty should not be levied against Respondent but does raise certain mitigating circumstances. Respondent initially John M. Brinjac June 29, 1992 Page 6 alleged that he did file a Statement of Financial Interests with nse to this the Governor's Office of Admi lra 1991, and thatohe had merely Commission's Notice letter of Jun e 18, been unaware of the dual filing requirement. The Supplemental it was in fact the Answer clarifies that, upon further inquiry, Governor's Code of Conduct form which was filed rather than the Statement of Financial Interests promulgated by this Commission. Respondent states that he was unaware of ththe e difference s between the Code of Conduct filing required by Administration and the Statement of Financial Interests filing required to be filed with this mmis s f . Financial Furthermore, Respondent avers that by filing a Statement calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission in response faith o the Order to Show Cause, he has acted in a prompt and good effort to resolve his disclosures with the Commonwealth. This Commission does consider mitigating /aggravating circumstances in determining whether and in what amount a civil penalty should be assessed. Respondent's filing of the Governor's Code of Conduct form in response to this Commission's Notice letter and his subsequent filing after the issuance of the Order to Show Cause of the proper form were measures by which he attempted to remedy the delinquency of his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990. On the other hand, Respondent knew or should have known of the filing requirements of this Commission especially filed a since, as a matter of public record, he his Commissionswhen he was proper form for calendar year 1989 a nominee. Based upon the totality of circumstances in this case, we hereby levy one civil penalty against Respondent John M. Brinjac in the total amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00). In levying the aforesaid civil penalty, we are cognizant that we could assess a per diem civil penalty against Respondent up to the total maximum amount of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) allowed by the Ethics Law, but have determined that an appropriate exercise of our discretion in this case would be to assess a lesser civil penalty in the total amount of $100.00. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Respondent John M. Brinjac is now and at all times relevant to these proceedings has been a Member of the State Registration Board for Professional Engineers and as such Respondent is a "public official" as that term is defined in the Ethics Law. 2. Pursuant to Section 4 of the Ethics Law, Respondent is required file l Statement n a nd the year Interests each year after year Responon dent holds the above positio John M. Brinjac .nine 29, 1992 Page 7 leaving said position. 3. Respondent was required by the Ethics Law to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration, which Statement of Financial Interests was due no later than May 1, 1991. 4. Respondent failed to comply with the requirements of Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law when Respondent failed to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration. 5. Notice of the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 was previously served upon Respondent in accordance with Section 7(5) of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. §407(5). 6. Respondent failed to remedy the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990, although Respondent was given fourteen (14) days from the date of the aforesaid Notice letter in which to do so. 7. Following the issuance of the Order to Show Cause, Respondent filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 dated April 10, 1992, and received by this Commission on April 13, 1992. 8. Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, a total civil penalty in the amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) shall be levied against Respondent in this matter. IN RE: JOHN M. BRINJAC Respondent : File Docket: 92 -010 -P Date Decided: June 23. 1992 Date Mailed: June 29, ;992 ORDER NO. 024 -S 1. John M. Brinjac, as a Member of the State Registration Board for Professional Engineers, failed to comply with Sections i and 5 of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. 55404, 405, by failing to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration. 2. Based upon the circumstances of this case, a total civil penalty in the amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) is hereby levied against Respondent John M. Brinjac. Respondent is ordered to pay the above civil penalty in the total amount of $100.00 within thirty days of the issuance of this Order, by forwarding a check to this Commission payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for deposit in the State Treasury. 3. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order will result in the initiation of an appropriate enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, James M. Howley, tg: