Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout055-S WolffIN RE: GEORGE B. WOLFF Respondent STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 Before: James M. Howley, Chair Daneen E. Reese, Vice Chair Dennis C. Harrington Roy W. Wilt Austin M. Lee Allan M. Kluger Joseph W. Marshall, III File Docket: 92 -093 -P Date Decided: February 16, 1993 Date Mailed: February 19, 1993 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. §401 et seq. 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. A formal Answer was not filed but a letter response was received. 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 SS2.38(b),(c). George B. Wolff February 19, 1993 Page 2 I. FINDINGS: 1. Respondent George B. Wolff is an adult individual who resides or maintains a mailing address at 486 Houtztown Road, Myerstown, Pennsylvania 17067. 2. Respondent is now and at all times relevant to these proceedings has been a Member of the State Conservation Commission. (a) Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1992. 3. Respondent did not file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration on or before May 1, 1992. 4. A Notice letter dated June 16 or June 17, 1992, and a final Notice letter dated July 20, 1992, were served upon Respondent by this Commission. The said Notice letters stated in detail the specific allegations against Respondent concerning the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 and the penalties for failure to file or for filing a deficient Statement of Financial Interests. Each of the said Notice letters 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 1991 within twenty (20) 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 1991 within twenty days of the date of the said final Notice letter. a. In a letter dated November 17, 1992, Respondent states that he is sorry that he failed to mail the Statement of Financial Interests form which he completed last summer. b. Respondent states his willingness to pay a penalty if assessed. 6. The records of the State Ethics Commission reflect that Respondent has previously been served with two Notices of the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for another calendar year, specifically calendar year 1990. a. Respondent ultimately filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990, which was received by this Commission on July 10, 1991. George B. Wolff February 19, 1993 Page 3 II. DISCUSSION: 7. As a matter of public record, Respondent filed a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 after issuance of the Order to Show Cause which Statement of Financial Interests is dated August 31, 1992 and was received by this Commission on November 20, 1992. Respondent is now and at all times relevant to these proceedings has been a Member of the State Conservation Commission. Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1992. As a Member of the State Conservation Commission, Respondent is a "public official" as that term is defined under the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), 65 P.S. 5401, et seq., and as such, Respondent is subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Factually,. Respondent failed to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 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. SS404,405. 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 1991. 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 1991 although given twenty days from the date of the aforesaid final 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 George B. Wolff February 19, 1993 Page 4 Respondent. Respondent's letter response to the Order to Show Cause has failed to show cause why a civil penalty should not be levied against Respondent in this matter. Respondent states that he filled out the form last summer but failed to mail it. No explanation is offered for the failure to mail the form, and the date of the form is well beyond the twenty -day "grace period" which was afforded by the final Notice letter issued to Respondent. Furthermore, this is not the first instance that Respondent has been delinquent in filing his Statement of Financial Interests. The records of the State Ethics Commission reflect that Respondent was previously served with two Notices of the delinquency of his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990, after which he ultimately filed that form received by this Commission on July 10, 1991. It is noted that Respondent's submitted Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 is deficient. Block 13 of said Statement of Financial Interests is not completed in any way whatsoever but is left blank. Based upon the totality of circumstances in this case, we hereby levy one civil penalty against Respondent George B. Wolff at the rate of $25.00 per day, for each day Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 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 Two- Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($250.00). Respondent shall be ordered to file an amended, complete and accurate Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Respondent George B. Wolff is now and at all times relevant to these proceedings has been a Member of the State Conservation Commission and as such Respondent is a "public official" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989. 2. Respondent failed to comply with the requiremepts of Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law when Respondent failed to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration. 3. Notice of the delinquency of Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 was previously served upon Respondent in accordance with Section 7(5) of the George B. Wolff February 19, 1993 Page 5 Ethics Law, 65 P.S. 5407(5). 4. Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, a maximum civil penalty is warranted. 5. Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991, dated August 31, 1992, and received by this Commission on November 20, 1992, is technically deficient. IN RE: GEORGE B. WOLFF Respondent ORDER NO. 055 -S File Docket: 92 -093 -P Date Decided: February 16, 1993 Date Mailed: February 19, 1993 1. George B. Wolff, as a Member of the State Conservation Commission, failed to comply with Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. §S404, 405, by failing to timely file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 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 George B. Wolff at the rate of $25.00 per day for each day Respondent's Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 has remained delinquent, for the total civil penalty of Two - Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($250.00). Respondent is ordered to pay the above civil penalty in the total amount of Two- Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($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 George B. Wolff is directed within 30 days of issuance of this Order to file an amended, complete and accurate Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 with the State Ethics Commission and the Governor's Office of Administration, correcting all technical deficiencies noted above and 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,