Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout063-S SiposIN RE: ARPAD K. SIPOS Respondent STATE ETHICS COMMISSION 308 FINANCE BUILDING HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120 File Docket: 94 -011 -P Date Decided: 05/04/95 Date Mailed: 05/16/95 Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair Austin M. Lee, Vice Chair Roy W. Wilt Boyd E. Wolff The Investigative Division of 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 by the Investigative Division in accordance with Section (7)(5) of the Ethics Law, as to which there was a letter response. The Investigative Division filed with the State Ethics Commission and served upon Respondent a Petition for Civil Penalties. An 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 (b) , (c) /21.29 (b) . Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 2 I. FINDINGS: 1. Respondent Arpad K. Sipos is an adult individual who resides or maintains a mailing address at 132 Sholly Drive, Mechanicsburg, PA 17055. 2. At all times relevant to these proceedings, Respondent was an Electrical Construction Inspector for the Pennsylvania Department of General Services, having resigned the aforesaid position on or about August 30, 1994. (a) Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993. 3. Respondent filed Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 which are alleged to be deficient. a. The Petition for Civil Penalties does not allege any specific deficiencies in the said forms. 4. A first Notice letter dated September 1, 1994 and a final Notice letter dated September 27, 1994 were served upon Respondent by the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission. The said Notice letters stated specific details concerning the deficiency of Respondent's Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 and the penalties for failure to file or for filing a deficient Statement of Financial Interests. The said Notice letters provided Respondent an opportunity to avoid the institution of these civil penalty proceedings by filing accurate and complete Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 within twenty (20) days of the dates of the respective Notice letters. a. The said Notice letters from the Investigative Division to Respondent are attached to the Petition for Civil Penalties as Exhibit "A" and are made a part thereof. b. The final notice letter from the Investigative Division to the Respondent references (but does not attach) material and statements in the possession of the Office of Inspector General, which information is stated to indicate that control of DCI was transferred to Respondent by power of attorney as of April 20, 1990 and that Respondent performed work regarding twelve (12) construction permits in the City of Harrisburg issued to DCI which resulted in payment to Respondent. That notice directs that "both your interest in DCI as well as the income derived therefrom which exceeded $1,000.00 in each year must be reported on your Statement of Financial Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 3 Interests." c. A responsive letter from Respondent to the Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission is attached to the Petition for Civil Penalties as Exhibit "B ". d. The said letters specifically pertain to whether Respondent had a reportable interest and reportable income from Dauphin Contractors, Inc. ( "DCI ") which should have been reported on the 1990 -1993 calendar year Statements of Financial Interests. 5. Respondent did not file amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 on or before the expiration of twenty days from the date of the said final Notice letter. 6. Thereafter, the Petition for Civil Penalties was filed with the State Ethics Commission on October 28, 1994 and was served upon Respondent by the Investigative Division. 7. An Order to Show Cause was issued to Respondent on November 18, 1994, and was promptly served upon Respondent, ordering that any Answer to the Petition for Civil Penalties be in writing and be received by the State Ethics Commission within thirty (30) days of the date of the said Order. a. The said Order to Show Cause specifically stated: "IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any Answer filed in response to this Order to Show Cause must be in writing and must be RECEIVED at this Commission within thirty days of the date of this Order as stated above. The Answer must specifically admit or deny each of the . allegations made in the attached Petition for Civil Penalty(ies), and must set forth the facts and state concisely the matters of law upon which Respondent relies. Matters not specifically denied shall be deemed admitted. Failure to file an Answer or the filing of general denial(s) will be deemed an admission of the allegations set forth in the attached Petition for Civil Penalty(ies) ." 8. No Answer was filed to the Petition for Civil Penalties. 9. Respondent did forward amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 to the State Ethics Commission which were dated November 17, 1994 and were received on November 21, 1994. a. It is the position of the Investigative Division, as Situps, 94 -011 -P Page 4 reflected in a letter docketed December 21, 1994, that said filings do not constitute an "Answer" and that they remain deficient. 10. On its face, Respondent's original Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 is deficient in that block 14 is not completed in any way but is left blank. a. Respondent's amended Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990 has notations at paragraphs 9, 10, 14 and 15 of the form which are partially illegible but appear to state that Respondent helped his daughter start DCI; loaned funds; purchased two houses and paid bills out of his pocket; helped his daughter start out and finance DCI; and worked for free to help. 11. On its face, Respondent's Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1991 and 1992 are completed incorrectly in that block 11 indicates that there are no direct or indirect sources of income, yet also indicates the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of General Services as such a source. a. Respondent's amended Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1991 indicates a "slash" and the word "no" in block 11 and also has various notations regarding DCI which appear to allege that Respondent's daughter and son -in -law eloped to Las Vegas and left Respondent to pay all the bills; that Respondent loaned funds to help his daughter; and that he paid the bills. b. Respondent's amended Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1992 has a notation which covers block 10 and 11 and another notation at block 14 which are partially illegible but appear to state that Respondent fixed the house with his funds and labor; put a lien on the property to protect his grandchildren's money which he invested in the business; that he helped to run DCI without compensation; and that all funds that the corporation received were used to pay bills with the corporation making no money and paying no wages. 12. There are no facially apparent deficiencies to the Respondent's original Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1993. a. Respondent's amended Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1993 notes under block 9 a mechanical lien with a notation as to his grandchildren's funds; block 11 states "no income" to Respondent; block 14 states that Respondent helped to run DCI; and finally at the bottom of the form, there appears a notation by which Respondent Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 5 asks that the Commission not waste any more of his time, and that he has to make a living and work. 13. DCI is not listed under block 11 as a direct or indirect source of income for the years 1990 through 1993 on either the Respondent's Statements or amended Statements of Financial Interests. II. DISCUSSION Respondent has been an Electrical Construction Inspector for the Pennsylvania Department of General Services at all times relevant to these proceedings. Respondent specifically held the aforesaid position in 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993. Having failed to file any answer to the Petition for Civil Penalties, the averments therein are deemed admitted by Respondent. As an Electrical Construction Inspector for the Pennsylvania Department of General Services, Respondent has at all times relevant to these proceedings been a "public employee" as that term is defined under the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), 65 P.S. §401, et seq., and as such, Respondent is subject to the provisions of the Ethics Law. Pursuant to Section 4(a) of the Ethics Law, Respondent is /was required to file a Statement of Financial Interests for the preceding calendar year with the Department of General Services each year Respondent held the above position and the year after Respondent left said position: (a) Each public official of the Commonwealth shall file a statement of financial interests for the preceding calendar year with the commission no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Each public employee and public official of the Commonwealth shall file a statement of financial interests for the preceding calendar year with the department, agency, body or bureau in which he is employed or to which he is appointed or elected no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Any other public employee or public official shall file a statement of financial interests with the governing authority of the political subdivision by which he is employed or within which he is appointed or elected no later than May 1 of each year that he holds such a position and of the year after he leaves such a position. Persons who are full -time or part -time solicitors for political subdivisions are required to file under this section. Sioos,, 94 -011 -P Page 6 65 P.S. 5404(a). The complete financial disclosure which Respondent as a ( "public employee ") is /was required to provide in the Statement of Financial Interests form is statutorily mandated in detail at Section 5 of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. §405, which provides: Section 5. Statement of financial interests (a) The statement of financial interests filed pursuant to this act shall be on a form prescribed by the commission. All information requested on the statement shall be provided to the best of the knowledge, information and belief of the person required to file and shall be signed under oath or equivalent affirmation. (b) The statement shall include the following information for the prior calendar year with regard to the person required to file the statement. (1) Name, address and public position. (2) Occupation or profession. (3) Any direct or indirect interest in any real estate which was sold or leased to the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions; purchased or leased from the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions; or which was the subject of any condemnation proceedings by the Commonwealth, any of its agencies or political subdivisions. (4) The name and address of each creditor to whom is owed in excess of $5,000 and the interest rate thereon. However, loans or credit extended between members of the immediate family and mortgages securing real property which is the principal or secondary residence of the person filing shall not be included. Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 7 (5) The name and address of any direct or indirect source of income totalling in the aggregate $1,000 or more. However, this provision shall not be construed to require the divulgence of confidential information protected by statute or existing professional codes of ethics or common law privileges. (6) The name and address of the source and the amount of any gift or gifts valued in the aggregate of $200 or more and the circumstances of each gift. This paragraph shall not apply to a gift or gifts received from a spouse, parent, parent by marriage, sibling, child, grandchild, other family member or friend when the circumstances make it clear that the motivation for the action was a personal or family relationship. However, for the purposes of this subsection, the term "friend" shall not include a registered lobbyist or an employee of a registered lobbyist. This paragraph shall not be applied retroactively. (7)(i) The name and address of the source and the amount of any payment for or reimbursement of actual expenses for transportation and lodging or hospitality received in connection with public office or employment where such actual expenses for transportation, and lodging or hospitality exceed $500 in thee course of a single occurrence. This paragraph shall not apply to expenses reimbursed by the governmental body or to expenses reimbursed by an organization or association of public officials or employees of political subdivisions which the public official or employee serves in an official capacity. Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 8 65 P.S. §405. (ii) This paragraph shall not be applied retroactively. (8) Any office, directorship, or employment of any nature whatsoever in any business entity. (9) Any financial interest in any legal entity engaged in business for profit. (10) The identity of any financial interest in a business with which the reporting person is or has been associated in the preceding calendar year which has been transferred to a member of the reporting person's immediate family. (c) Except where an amount is required to be reported pursuant to subsection (b)(6) and (7), the statement of financial interests need not include specific amounts for the items required to be listed. (d) On a biennial basis commencing in January 1991, the Commission shall review the dollar amounts set forth in this section and may increase these amounts to such rates as are deemed reasonable for assuring appropriate disclosure. The commission shall publish any such adjusted threshold amounts in the Pennsylvania Bulletin by February 1, 1991, and every two years thereafter as necessary. In light of the fact that Respondent failed to file any Answer to the Petition for Civil Penalties, Respondent is deemed to have admitted the allegations in the Petition for Civil Penalties. Additionally, certain facial deficiencies are apparent on three of the four Statements of Financial Interests in question: 1. Respondent failed to complete block number 14 for his Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1990, and failed to legibly complete said block on his amended filing. 2. Block 11 of Respondent's Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1991 and 1992 have been incorrectly completed in that they give conflicting Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 9 information as to Respondent's direct or indirect sources of income. The Respondent has failed to list DCI as a source of income for the calendar years 1990 through 1993 which, given the failure to file an Answer to the Petition for Civil Penalties, are now deemed as a source of income for the four years in question. Therefore, the Respondent filed deficient Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993 which constitute a failure to comply with Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law. 65 P.S. §404, 405. As for this particular action, we are presently only dealing with a Petition for Civil Penalties. 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. 5409(f). An application of Section 9(f) to this case establishes that this Commission has the discretion to levy a civil penalty against the Respondent for each such delinquent or deficient Statement of Financial Interests. The prerequisite service of a Notice letter in accordance with Section 7(5) was satisfied. Furthermore, upon being notified of the above transgression(s), Respondent did not remedy Respondent's failure to comply with the Ethics Law, although he was given until the expiration of twenty days from the date of the final Notice letter in which to comply so as to avoid the institution of these formal proceedings. The Investigative Division then instituted formal proceedings against Respondent by filing with the State Ethics Commission and serving upon Respondent a Petition for Civil Penalty(ies). The State Ethics Commission issued an Order to Show Cause, ordering Respondent to show cause why civil penalties should not be levied against him. Sipos, 94 -011 -P Page 10 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 civil penalties should not be levied against him in this matter. It is noted that following the issuance of the Order to Show Cause, Respondent filed amended Statements of Financial Interests dated November 17, 1994 for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993, which filings failed to cure the facial deficiencies noted above as well as failed to list DCI as a source of income under block 11. Based upon the totality of circumstances in this case, we hereby levy one civil penalty against Respondent Arpad K. Sipos in the total amount of $250.00. In levying the aforesaid civil penalty, we are cognizant that we could assess a per diem civil penalty against Respondent for each violation up to the total maximum amount of Two Hundred Fifty Dollars ($250.00) per violation allowed by the Ethics Law with a total of $1,000.00 for the four years, but have determined that an appropriate exercise of our discretion on the record before us in this case would be to assess the aforesaid lesser civil penalty. In Port, Order 42 -S, we assessed a total penalty of $250.00 for the failure to file for three years. In the cited case, the respondent sought to file an Answer after the 30 day period expired as well as filed the Financial Interest Statements after the Order to Show Cause was issued which were deficient. Although we could have imposed a penalty of $750.00 in that case, we imposed a penalty of $250.00 based upon no prior history of civil penalty proceedings. Respondent in this case similarly has no such prior history. Respondent shall be ordered to file complete and accurate Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 as delineated above. III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW: 1. Respondent Arpad R. Sipos was at all times relevant to these proceedings an Electrical Construction Inspector for the Pennsylvania Department of General Services, and as such, Respondent was at all times relevant to these proceedings a "public employee" 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 filed deficient Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992, and 1993. Si os, 94 -011 -P Page 11 3. Notice of the deficiency of Respondent's Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 was previously served upon Respondent in accordance with Section 7(5) of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. 5407(5). 4. Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, a civil penalty is warranted. 5. Respondent's Amended Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991 and 1992, dated November 17, 1994, and received on November 21, 1994 by this Commission, are technically deficient. 6. Respondent failed to list DCI as a source of income on either his Financial Interest Statements or amended Financial Interest Statements for the calendar years 1990 through 1993. IN RE: ARPAD K. SIPOS Respondent File Docket: 94 -011 -P Date Decided: 05/04/95 Date Mailed: 05/16/95 ORDER NO. 063 -S 1. Arpad K. Sipos, as an Electrical Construction Inspector for the Pennsylvania Department of General Services failed to comply with Sections 4 and 5 of the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. § §404, 405, by filing deficient Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993. 2. Based upon the circumstances of this case, one civil penalty is hereby levied against Respondent Sipos in the amount of $250.00. 3. Respondent Sipos is ordered to pay the above civil penalty in the 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. 4. Respondent Sipos is directed within 30 days of issuance of this Order to file complete and accurate Statements) of Financial Interests for calendar years 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 correcting all technical deficiencies noted above, listing DCI as a source of income for each year and providing full financial disclosure as required by the Ethics Law, and to forward a copy /copies of same to this Commission at the following address to evidence compliance: State Ethics Commission 309 Finance Building P.O. Box 11470 Harrisburg, PA 17108 -1470 Attention: Legal Division 5. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order will result in the initiation of an appropriate enforcement action. BY THE COMMISSION, A .,) , u E &MJ Daneen E. Reese, Chair