Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout029-S BishopIN RE: SAMUEL E. BISHOP Respondent STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 Before: James M. Howley, Chair Daneen E. Reese, Vice Chair Roy W. Wilt Austin M. Lee Allan M. Kluger File Docket: 92 -060 -P Date Decided: September 15, 1992 Date Mailed: September 18, 1992 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. 5401 et sem . 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 was not filed and a hearing was deemed 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. Samuel E. Bishop September 18, 1992 Page 2 I. FINDINGS 1. Respondent Samuel E. Bishop is an adult individual who resides or maintains a mailing address at 436 East Vernon Road, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19119. 2. At all times relevant to these proceedings, Respondent has been a Member of the State Board of Occuptional Therapy Education and Licensure. (a) Although Respondent's term has expired, at all times relevant to these proceedings, Respondent served on the aforesaid Board and was not replaced. (b) Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1991. 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. 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. 5. Respondent did not file a Statement of Financial Interests 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 letter. 6. The public records of the State Ethics Commission reflect that in Bishop Order No. 517, Respondent was found'in violation of the Ethics Law for _failing to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1984 for this same public office. 7. In Commgnwealth of Pennsylvania, State Ethics Commission v. Anderson, et al., a law suit initiated by the Commission on October 7, 1988, in the Commonwealth Court of Pensylvania to No. 2374 C.D. 1988, the Commission previously brought suit against Respondent for failing to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1986 for this same public office. Samuel E. Bishop September 18, 1992 Page 3 8. The public records of the State Ethics Commission reflect that Respondent has previously been served with Notices of the delinquency of his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1987. II. DISCUSSION: Respondent has been a Member of the State Board of Occuptaional Therapy Education and Licensure at all times relevant to these proceedings. Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1991. As a Member of the State Board of Occupational Therapy Education and Licensure, Respondent has at all . times relevant to these proceedings been a "public official" as that term is defined under the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), 65 P.S. §401, et sea., and as such, subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. 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. 65 P.S. § 5404,405. Section 9(f) of the Ethics Law provides as follows: (f) In addition to any other civil remedy or 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. §409(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. The prerequisite service of a Notice letter in accordance with Section 7(5) was satisfied. Respondent did not remedy the failure to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 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 Samuel E. Bishop September 18, 1992 Page 4 to show cause why a civil penalty should not be levied against Respondent pursuant to Section 9(f) of the Ethics Law. Respondent did not file an answer to the Order to Show Cause. There is nothing of record which would constitute a defense or excuse for Respondent's failure to comply with the Ethics Law. Respondent has failed to show cause why a civil penalty should not be levied against Respondent in this matter. We would further note that the public records of the State Ethics Commission reflect that in Bishop, Order No. 517, Respondent was found in violation of the Ethics Law for failing to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1984 for this same public office. Also, in Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, State Ethics Commission v. Anderson, et al., a law suit initiated by the Commission on October 7, 1988, in the Commonwealth Court of Pensylvania to No. 2374 C.D. 1988, the Commission previously brought suit against Respondent for failing to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1986 for this same public office. The public records of the State Ethics Commission further reflect that Respondent has previously been served with Notice of the delinquency of his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1987. It is clear that as a Member of the State Board of Occupational Therapy Education and Licensure, Respondent knows that he is a public official required to file Statements of Financial Interests pursuant to Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law. Based upon the totality of circumstances in this case, we hereby levy one civil penalty against Respondent Samuel E. Bishop at the rate of $25.00 per day, for each day Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 has remained delinquent. Given the number of days during which the Statement of Financial Interests has remained delinquent, the resultant amount to be levied against Respondent is $250.00. Respondent shall be ordered to file a complete and accurate Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Respondent Samuel E. Bishop was at all times relevant to these proceedings a Member of the State Board of Occupational Therapy Education and Licensure and as such Respondent was a "public official" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989. 2. 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. Samuel E. Bishop September 18, 1992 Page 5 3. 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. 5407(5). Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, a maximum civil penalty is warranted. IN RE: SAMUEL E. BISHOP : File Docket: 92 -060 -P : Date Decided: September 15, 1992 Respondent : Date Mailed: September 18, 1992 ORDER NO. 029 -S 1. Samuel E. Bishop, as a Member of the State Board of Occupational Therapy Education and Licensure, failed to comply with Sections 4 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, this Commission hereby levies one civil penalty against Respondent Samuel E. Bishop at the rate of $25.00 per day for each day Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 has remained delinquent, for the total civil penalty of $250.00. Respondent is ordered to pay the above civil penalty in the total amount of $250.00 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. Respondent Samuel E. Bishop is directed within 30 days of issuance of this Order to file a complete and accurate Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration, providing full financial disclosure as required by the Ethics Law. 4. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order will result in the initiation of an appropriate enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, Osage O 4 ,0 James M. Howley, Che'