HomeMy WebLinkAbout134 HopkinsMr. John Pc Hopkins, Jr.
939 Brownsville Road
Middletown Township
Langhorne, PA 19047
Dear Mr. Hopkins:
are:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
July 16, 1982
ORDER OF COMMISSION
No. 134
Re: #82 -03 -C
The State Ethics Commission has received a complaint regarding you and a
possible violation of Act 170 of 1978. The Commission has now completed its
investigation into these allegations and finds no violation of Act 170.
The individual allegations and findings on which our conclusion is based
I. Allegation: That Mr. John P. Hopkins, Jr., a supervisor in Middletown
Township, participated in Board actions for his own personal gain; that this
is a use of his public office or confidential information received through
holding public office for personal - financial gain and is prohibited by Section
3(a) of the Ethics Act.
II. Findings:
1. You had been a township supervisor for six years and your term
expired on December 31, 1981. You held various offices such as township
supervisor, secretary - treasurer, vice - chairman and chairman of the township
supervisors during this period.
2. On March 14, 1979 citizens presented a petition to the township
requesting improvements on Adams & Lincoln Avenues.
3. Between that date and October 23, 1979, the Board of Supervisors
requested bids for these improvements and awarded a contract. You parti-
cipated in each of the decisions.
4. On May 20, 1980, you voted for an assessment of property owners for
the paving of Adams & Lincoln Avenues.
5. Property owners can be identified by a review of courthouse records
or a tax map and list of property owners and addresses which is kept in the
Middletown Township Municipal Building.
Mr. John P. Hopkins, Jr.
July 16, 1982
Page 2
6. On July 29; 1980, you purchased property from Mr. McBride for a price
of $1,000. On September 22, 1980, you purchased property from the Cafferky's
for $2,000. These properties border on Lincoln and /or Adams Avenue.
7. Mr.:Cafferky approached you concerning the sale of his property and
he received hat he considered a fair price for the lot. You called Mr.
McBride to ask him if he was interested in buying the Cafferky property; he
was not. The sale of the McBride property was handled through a real estate
agent.
8. A certificate of non - conformance approved by the township was
required before building on these properties because of their small size. You
applied for a certificate of non - conformance on January 22, 1981, but withdrew
it on September 22, 1981.
9. On October 14, 1981, you sold these properties to Mrs. Rose Lewis and
her husband for $10,600.
III. Discussion: Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official
from using his office or confidential information gained through that office
for personal financial gain.
While you participated in township decisions affecting residents on Adams
& Lincoln Avenues, there is no evidence that you used your office or confi-
dential information acquired through that office for the purchase and sale of
the McBride and Cafferky properties. The actions taken by the supervisors
were public matters and were taken in response to petitions by township
citizens.
The owners of the properties you purchased could also have been iden-
tified by any person by going to the courthouse or to the tax
map and list of property owners maintained at the township municipal building.
In addition, the McBride property was listed with a real estate agent and
therefore was public information.
We find no evidence that you used your office or confidential informatien
from that office in any of these transactions.
IV. Conclusion: You have not violated Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act (Act
170 -1978)
Mr. John P. Hopkins, Jr.
July 16, 1982
Page 3
Our files in this case will remain confidential in accordance with
Section 3(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 408(a). However, this Order is final
and will become available as a public document within 15 days unless you file
documentation with the Commission which justifies reconsideration and /or
challenges pertinent fctual findings. During this 15 -day period, no one,
including the ; Respondent unless he waives his right to challenge this Order,
may violat% this confidentiality by releasing, discussing or ciculating this
Order.
Any person who violates the confidentiality of a Commission proceeding is
guilty to a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than $1000 or imprisoned
for not more than one year or both, see 65 P.S. 409(e).
PJS /rdp
Sincerely,
Paul J
Chair