HomeMy WebLinkAbout1024 CampbellIn Re: Richard Campbell, Esquire
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
File Docket: 96- 001 -C2
Date Decided: 9/19/96
Date Mailed: 9/24/96
Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair
Roy W. Wilt
Allan M. Kluger
Rev. Joseph G. Quinn
This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission.
Procedurally, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission
conducted an investigation regarding a possible violation of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. §401 el sea., by the above -
named Respondent. At the commencement of its investigation, the Investigative
Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific allegations. Upon
completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served upon
Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer
was filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete.
This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission will be made available as a
public document thirty days after the mailing date noted above. However,
reconsideration may be requested. Any reconsideration request must be received at
this Commission within thirty days of the mailing date and must include a detailed
explanation of the reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity
with 51 Pa. Code §21.29(b). A request for reconsideration will not affect the finality
of this adjudication but will defer its public release pending action on the request by
the Commission.
The files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with Act 9 of 1989,
65 P.S. §408(h). Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Law is guilty
of a misdemeanor subject to a fine of not more than $ 1,000 or imprisonment for not
more than one year, 65 P.S. §409(e). Confidentiality does not preclude discussing this
case with an attorney at law.
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
That Richard Campbell, a public official /employee in his capacity as a Solicitor
for Lamar Township, Clinton County, violated the following provisions of the State
Ethics Act (Act 9 of 1989) when he failed to 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 1st of each year that he
holds such a position by failing to file Statements of Financial Interests for the 1992,
1993 and 1994 calendar years with Lamar Township; and when he backdated
Statement of Financial Interests forms for the 1992, 1993 and 1994 calendar years.
Section 4. Statement of financial interests required to be
filed
(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. 65 P.S. §404(a).
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. 65 P.S. §405(a).
I1. FINDINGS:
1. The Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission received information
alleging that Richard Campbell violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act
9 of 1989).
2. Upon review of the information by the Director of Investigations a
recommendation was made to the Executive Director to commence an own -
motion preliminary inquiry.
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 3
3. At the direction of the Executive Director, the Investigative Division initiated a
preliminary inquiry on January 5, 1996.
4. The preliminary inquiry was completed within sixty days.
5. On March 5, 1996, a letter was forwarded to Richard Campbell, by the
Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission, informing him that a
complaint against him was received by the Investigative Division and that a full
investigation was being commenced.
a. Said letter was forwarded by certified mail, No. P 281 100 761.
b. The domestic return receipt bore the signature of Joan Kerstetter, with
a delivery date of March 7, 1996.
6. The full investigation was commenced at the direction of the Executive Director
of the State Ethics Commission.
7. Periodic notice letters were forwarded to Richard Campbell in accordance with
the provisions of the Ethics Law advising him of the general status of the
investigation.
8. The Investigative Complaint was mailed to the Respondent on August 19,
1996.
9. Richard Campbell has been an attorney since 1966.
10. Campbell is a partner with the law firm of Miller, Kistler, Campbell, Miller &
Williams, Inc. in State College, Pennsylvania.
a. Campbell's law practice primarily involves municipal law.
11. Campbell has also served as a board member for the Disciplinary Board of the
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania since 1990.
a. He currently serves as the Chairman.
12. Richard Campbell has served as solicitor for Lamar Township since 1992.
a. Campbell has been appointed on an annual basis by the board of
supervisors.
b. Campbell previously served as solicitor for Lamar Township from 1974
through 1989.
13. No retainer for Richard Campbell's service as solicitor was set by the board of
supervisors.
a. Campbell has been paid for services rendered.
b. Campbell does not regularly attend board of supervisor meetings.
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 4
14. Campbell has been compensated as follows by Lamar Township for legal
services as township solicitor:
so.
1992:
1993:
1994:
1995:
$ 836.00
$1,256.00
$1,605.79
$1,156.50
15. Campbell also serves as solicitor for the following governmental entities:
a. College- Harris Joint Authority
b. Ferguson Township Water and Sewer Authority
c. Howard Borough Authority
d. Lamar Township Supervisors
e. Liberty Township Sewer Authority
f. Mountaintop Area Municipal Authority
g. Patton Township
h. Patton Township Authority
Patton - Ferguson Joint Authority
j. Port Matilda Borough Authority
k. Mid- Centre County Authority
I. Snow Shoe Township Municipal Authority
m. South Philipsburg Borough
n. Spring- Benner - Walker Joint Authority
o. University Area Joint Authority.
16. Richard Campbell has annually filed Statements of Financial Interests with
Patton Township.
a. Campbell has filed statements with any municipality requesting him to do
17. Richard Campbell, in his capacity as solicitor for Patton Township, Centre
County, filed Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1992 through
1994.
a. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1992 was dated
April 5, 1993. The form was filed on SEC Revised Form 1/93.
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 5
b. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1993 was dated
April 3, 1994. The form was filed on SEC Revised Form 1/94.
c. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1994 was dated
March 6, 1995. The form was filed on SEC Revised Form 1/95.
18. A compliance review conducted in Lamar Township on October 11, 1995, for
the 1992 through 1994 calendar years concluded that no forms were on file for
Richard Campbell.
19. On November 30, 1995, Campbell was sent a Notice of Intent to Commence
Civil Penalty Proceedings for delinquency of Statements of Financial Interests.
a. The notice stated that Campbell had failed to file Statements of Financial
Interests for the 1992, 1993 and 1994 calendar years.
b. The notice advised Campbell that Civil Penalty Proceedings could be
avoided if Statements of Financial Interests were filed during the 20 day
grace period.
20. Statements of Financial Interests for Richard Campbell were provided to the
Ethics Commission by Lamar Township Secretary /Treasurer Robert Miller on
December 13, 1995.
a. The Statements of Financial Interests obtained for Campbell were for the
calendar years 1992, 1993 and 1994.
21. The Statements of Financial Interests filed by Campbell listed his signature and
the date when he filed the form.
a.
b.
c.
The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1992 was dated
March 15, 1992.
The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1993 was dated
April 10, 1993.
The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1994 was dated
May 10, 1994.
22. Campbell filed all the Statements of Financial Interests listed in Finding No. 20
on SEC Revised Form 1/95.
a. SEC Revised Form 1/95 was not available for distribution until January,
1995.
23. Richard Campbell filed the Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years
1992 through 1994 with Lamar Township after the compliance review was
conducted on October 11, 1995. (See Finding No. 17)
24. The Statements of Financial Interests filed by Campbell for Lamar Township
were backdated giving the impression that they were timely filed.
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 6
25. Campbell confirmed the Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years
1992, 1993 and 1994 were not filed with Lamar Township until December,
1995.
a. Campbell asserts there was no intent to deceive on his part when he
dated the Statements of Financial Interests.
b. It was an oversight and misinterpretation on his part on how he should
have filled out the form.
26. Campbell arbitrarily picked out dates for each of the three Statements of
Financial Interests he filed so as to reflect the accuracy of the information as of
these dates.
a. Campbell assumed the information was true and correct at that point in
time.
b. Campbell used information from Statements of Financial Interests he
previously submitted to Patton Township.
c. All three forms were then submitted to Lamar Township.
27. Campbell did not make copies of the Statements of Financial Interests he filed
with Patton Township for the 1992 through 1994 calendar years with Lamar
Township because Lamar Township Secretary /Treasurer Robert Miller wanted
the forms returned as soon as possible.
a. Campbell did not have any copies of the Statements of Financial Interests
he filed with Patton Township.
b. Campbell believed it would have taken too long to wait for copies from
Patton Township.
28. Campbell filed Statements of Financial Interests with the following Authorities
on February 13, 1996, for calendar years 1992 through 1994.
a. University Area Joint Authority
b. Patton - Ferguson Joint Authority
c. College- Harris Joint Authority
29. The Statements of Financial Interests Campbell filed were copies of the forms
he filed with Patton Township in 1992 through 1994.
a. He changed the name of the political subdivision in Item Seven of the
form for each Authority.
30. Campbell did not deny any of the Findings set forth in the Investigative
Complaint, but Campbell did proffer the following supplemental information in
a Response, to which supplemental information the Investigative Division has
stipulated:
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 7
a. As supplemental information to Finding 10 of the Investigative Complaint
and above, Campbell is an officer /shareholder /employee of Miller, Kistler,
Campbell, Miller & Williams, Inc.
(1) Approximately 25% of Campbell's law practice involves municipal
law.
b. As supplemental information to Finding 11 of the Investigative Complaint
and above, Campbell previously served as a member of a hearing
committee for the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of
Pennsylvania, and currently serves as a chairman of Hearing Committee
No. 3.08.
c. As supplemental information to Finding 21 of the Investigative Complaint
and above, the Statements of Financial Interests filed by Campbell were
signed by Campbell. The forms were not dated when he filed the forms
but when he believed the forms were due. The forms do not indicate
when they should be dated.
d. As supplemental information to Finding 24 of the Investigative Complaint
and above, the Statements of Financial Interests filed by Campbell for
Lamar Township were backdated so as to reflect the accuracy of the
information as of the dates of the years in question. The forms were
filed at the request of the Ethics Commission with the promise that civil
penalties could be avoided if Statements of Financial Interests were filed
within 20 days so there could be no intent to deceive. Campbell
promptly complied with that request.
e. As supplemental information to Finding 27a of the Investigative
Complaint and above, Campbell had copies of Statements of Financial
Interests filed with Patton Township, but the forms were undated.
Because of concern to meet the deadline imposed, Campbell used the
only blank forms available (1995) and inserted the information from the
Patton Township Statements of Financial Interests and then assigned the
arbitrary dates since the actual dates On the Patton Township forms were
unavailable. Campbell felt his actions in filing backdated forms was as
demanded by the Commission.
f. As supplemental information to Finding 29 of the Investigative Complaint
and above, the Statements of Financial Interests Campbell filed with
these three authorities were actual copies of the Patton Township forms
for 1992 through 1994 which he later acquired after the Commission's
20 -day imposed deadline.
III. DISCUSSION:
At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Richard Campbell, Esquire,
hereinafter Campbell, has been the Solicitor for Lamar Township in Clinton County,
Pennsylvania.
The issue before us is whether Campbell violated Sections 4(a) and 5(a)of the
Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law
26, 65 P.S. §401, et seq., when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with
Campbell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 8
Lamar Township for the 1992, 1993 and 1994 calendar years, and when he
backdated Statement of Financial Interests forms for those calendar years.
Section 4(a) of the Ethics Law quoted above requires that each public
official /public employee must file a Statement of Financial Interests for the preceding
calendar year, each year that he holds the position and the year after he leaves it.
Section 4(a) also specifically mandates: "Persons who are full -time or part -time
solicitors for political subdivisions are required to file under this section."
Section 5(a) of the Ethics Law quoted above requires that the Statement of
Financial Interests be filed on the form prescribed by the Commission. All information
requested on the statement must be provided to the best of the knowledge,
information and belief of the person required to file, and the form must be signed
under oath or equivalent affirmation.
Preliminarily, we shall address the legal issues.
In his response to the Investigative Complaint, Campbell proffers two "proposed
additional findings," which are really legal arguments. First, Campbell states that he
does not believe that a solicitor representing multiple municipal clients is a public
official or public employee as those terms are used in Act 9. Second, Campbell states
that he also believes that a definitive judicial interpretation of Act 9's application to
attorneys representing municipal entities has not been obtained, and that Section 5
filings are therefore non - mandatory unless requested by the appropriate political
subdivision. We reject both of Campbell's arguments.
First, this Commission is of the view — and has so held — that a Solicitor is a
public official /public employee as defined in Act 9. See, e.g., Medico, Order 822.
However, we need not revisit that issue in this case. This case pertains exclusively
to the FIS filing requirements of the Ethics Law, and Section 4(a) expressly and
specifically includes Solicitors as among those who must comply with those
requirements (see also, State Ethics Commission Regulations at 51 Pa.Code §15.2(g)).
Furthermore, we reject Campbell's suggestion that he need not obey the law
pending a "definitive judicial interpretation." We find that the law as promulgated by
the Legislature is clear, j . definitive, and j . in full force and effect. We shall enforce
the filing requirement as it is clearly stated in Sections 4 and 5 of Act 9 of 1989.
Having dispelled the legal issues which have been raised, we shall now
summarize the facts.
Campbell serves as Solicitor for numerous governmental entities, two of which
are Lamar Township and Patton Township. Although Campbell has annually filed
Statements of Financial Interests with Patton Township, and with any municipality that
has requested that he do so, Lamar Township is the filing location which is of concern
in this case. The delinquent filings which are in question in this case are for calendar
years 1992, 1993, and 1994.
At all times relevant to this case, Campbell has served as Solicitor for Lamar
Township. He has specifically served in that position since 1992. A Statement of
Financial Interests compliance review was conducted by the Investigative Division in ".
Campbell 96- 001 -C2
Page 9
Lamar Township on October 11, 1995, for the 1992 through 1994 calendar years.
No forms were on file there for Richard Campbell.
Campbell did file Statements of Financial Interests for those calendar years with
Patton Township. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1992 was
dated April 5, 1993. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1993 was
dated April 3, 1994. The Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1994 was
dated March 6, 1995.
In enforcing the filing requirement as to Lamar Township, the Investigative
Division initially proceeded under the civil penalty process of this Commission, rather
than the investigative process. The civil penalty process is founded in Section 9(f) of
the Ethics Law, 65 P.S. §409(f) (for applicable Regulations, see, 51 Pa.Code §19.3).
On November 30, 1995, the Investigative Division issued to Campbell a Notice
of Intent to Commence Civil Penalty Proceedings as to these delinquent Statements
of Financial Interests. The Notice stated that Campbell had failed to file Statements
of Financial Interests for the 1992, 1993, and 1994 calendar years. The Notice
advised Campbell that civil penalty proceedings could be avoided if Statements of
Financial Interests were filed within 20 days.
In December, 1995, in response to the aforesaid Notice letter of the
Investigative Division and within the 20 -day grace period, Campbell filed Statements
of Financial Interests with Lamar Township for calendar years 1992, 1993, and 1994.
The problem with those forms is that Campbell "backdated" them. Campbell has
admitted that he backdated the forms. Moreover, the fact that the forms were
backdated is clear on the face of the documents: each filing was on SEC revised form
1/95, that was not available for distribution until January, 1995. The form for
calendar year 1992 was dated March 15, 1992. The form for calendar year 1993 was
dated April 10, 1993. The form for calendar year 1994 was dated May 10, 1994.
After Campbell filed the backdated forms, rather than proceeding under the civil
penalty process, the Executive Director initiated a preliminary inquiry, which was
followed by a full investigation.
The Investigative Division avers, and Campbell does not deny, that in backdating
the forms, Campbell was giving the impression that they were timely filed. However,
Campbell asserts, and the Investigative Division does not deny, that Campbell did not
intend to deceive when he backdated the Statements of Financial Interests. It was an
oversight and misinterpretation as to how he should fill out the forms. Campbell dated
the forms according to when he believed they had been due. The forms were
backdated so as to reflect the accuracy of the information as of the dates of the years
in question. Campbell arbitrarily picked out the dates and he assumed the information
was true and correct at such points in time.
In completing the forms, Campbell inserted the information from Statements of
Financial Interests which he previously filed with Patton Township. However, the
copies of the Patton Township forms which Campbell had were undated, and the
actual dates on the Patton Township forms were unavailable. Campbell therefore
assigned the arbitrary dates, feeling that his actions in filing backdated forms was as
demanded by the Commission.
Camobell, 96- 001 -C2
Page 10
Campbell has noted that the forms themselves do not indicate how they should
be dated. Campbell has also noted that the forms were filed at the request of the
State Ethics Commission with the promise that civil penalties could be avoided if the
Statements of Financial Interests were filed within 20 days, such that Campbell states
there could have been no intent to deceive.
In applying the law to the relevant facts, we determine that Campbell did violate
Sections 4(a) and 5(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he failed to timely file Statements of
Financial Interests for calendar years 1992, 1993, and 1994 with Lamar Township on
the form as prescribed by the State Ethics Commission. There really is no question
that the forms were untimely. The form for calendar year 1992 was due on or before
May 1, 1993. The form for calendar year 1993 was due on or before May 1, 1994.
The form for calendar year 1994 was due on or before May 1, 1995. None of the
three forms were filed with Lamar Township until December, 1995.
As for the backdating portion of the allegation in particular, we find that under
the circumstances of this case, the proper disposition is for Campbell to file
Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1992, 1993, and 1994 using a
current date. If Campbell complies within thirty days of this Order, no further action
will be taken. Failure to comply will result in an order enforcement action.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Richard Campbell, Esquire (Campbell), as Solicitor for Lamar Township in Clinton
County, Pennsylvania, is required to file Statements of Financial Interests in
compliance with the Ethics Law.
2. Campbell technically violated Sections 4(a) and 5(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he
failed to timely file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1992,
1993, and 1994 with Lamar Township on the form as prescribed by the State
Ethics Commission.
3. Campbell shall be directed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar
years 1992, 1993, and 1994 with Lamar Township using a current date.
In Re: Richard Campbell, Esquire File Docket: 96- 001 -C2
Date Decided: 9/19/96
Date Mailed: 9/24/96
ORDER NO. 1024
•
1. Richard Campbell, Esquire (Campbell), as Solicitor for Lamar Township in Clinton
County, Pennsylvania, is required to file Statements of Financial Interests in
compliance with the Ethics Law.
2. Campbell technically violated Sections 4(a) and 5(a) of Act 9 of 1989 when he
failed to timely file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1992,
1993, and 1994 with Lamar Township on the form as prescribed by the State
Ethics Commission.
3. Campbell is directed within thirty days of issuance of this Order to file
Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 1992, 1993, and 1994 with
Lamar Township using a current date.
a. Compliance with the above will result in the closing of this case with no
further action.
b. Failure to comply with the above will result in the institution of an order
enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
DANEEN E. REESE, CHAIR