HomeMy WebLinkAbout510-R AllenJohn M. Allen, Jr.
Box 464
Saxonburg, PA 16056
Re: Order No. 510, 86 -046 -C
Dear Mr. Allen:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
RECONSIDERATION ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
Order No. 510 -R
DECIDEDDEC 19 1986
f , AILEDjAN 5 197
This refers to the request for Reconsideration presented on November 21,
1986, with respect to the above - captioned Order issued on October 30, 1986,
pursuant to 51 Pa. Code 2.38. The discretion of the State Ethics Commission
to grant reconsideration is properly invoked, pursuant to our regulations, 51
Pa. Code 2.38(b) when:
(b) Any party may ask the Commission to reconsider an Order within 15
days of service of the Order. The person requesting reconsideration
should present a detailed explanation setting forth the reason why the
Order should be reconsidered. Reconsideration may be granted at the
discretion of the Commission only where any of the following occur:
(1) a material error of law has been made;
(2) a material error of fact has been made;
(3) new facts or evidence are provided which
would lead to reversal or modification
of the order and where these could not
be or were not discovered previously by
the exercise of due diligence.
The Commission, having reviewed your request, must DENY your request
because none of these circumstances are present.
Specifically, in your letter requesting reconsideration, you have
indicated that you believe certain mitigating factors should be reviewed by
the State Ethics Commission in consideration of the current matter. In this
respect, you indicated that you have continuously served Clinton Township,
Butler County, since 1967 when you first served on the Clinton Township
John M. Allen, Jr.
Page 2
Planning Commission. You indicate that you have consistently served the
citizens of that community and that you received nothing for the many hours of
service which you provided other than token compensation that was provided to
you as township supervisor. You do not, however, contest any of the facts as
set forth in the Order of the State Ethics Commission. Indeed, in your letter
of request, you specifically acknowledge that you failed to comply with the
laws of Pennsylvania when you did not file your Statement of Financial
Interests. You further, specifically, confirm in your letter of request, that
while you believe that it is the responsibility of every individual to
contribute to his community, you do not believe in the Ethics Act for public
officials. You believe that this is an invasion of privacy and that it
constitutes harassment of well- meaning public officials. You, once again,
confirmed in your letter that you intentionally failed to file your Statement
of Financial Interests because it was your "little way of protesting Act 170."
You further indicated that "I simply ignored the requirement to file a
Statement of Financial Interests." As set forth in our original order, not
only did you fail to file the Statement of Financial Interests, you attempted
to deceive the citizens of Clinton Township when you filed a sealed envelope
containing a blank Statement of Financial Interests. Not only did you ignore
the requirements of the laws of this Commonwealth, you intentionally attempted
to prevent anyone from immediately discerning your failure to file. In your
letter of request, you have indicated your belief that this was not a daring
protest. We disagree. Your action, in this respect, is a defiance of the
General Assembly of Pennsylvania which has set the public policy standards for
officials serving the public through the promulgation of the State Ethics Act.
It was the authority of this legislative body that placed upon you the
requirement to file a Statement of Financial Interests. Additionally, the
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the highest judicial body in the Commonwealth,
confirmed the requirement that public officials must file Statements of
Financial Interests in the cases cited in our original order. You defied both
of these lawfull authorities of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Indeed,
your protest is extremely daring in that the penalty for such a violation is
criminal in nature in that the State Ethics Act provides as follows:
Section 9. Penalties.
(b) Any person who violates the provisions of Section 4 is
guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than
$1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or be
both fined and imprisoned. 65 P.S. 409(b).
While these penalties are set forth in the State Ethics Act, this
Commission has exhibited an extreme amount of reasonable discretion by not
recommending your prosecution, but simply requiring that you divest yourself
John M. Allen, Jr.
Page 3
of all financial gain obtained in violation of the Act. We did not even go as
far as to impose the treble damage provisions of the State Ethics Act which
provide as follows:
Section 9. Penalties.
(c) Any person who obtains financial gain from violating
any provision of this act, in addition to any other
penalty provided by law, shall pay into the State
Treasurey a sum of money equal to three times the
financial gain resulting from such violation. 65 P.S.
409(c).
While you may disagree with the conclusions reached by this Commission,
you do not disagree with the findings. Your failure to file a Statement of
Financial Interests was intentional in nature as you so admit. Your failure
to file, in this respect, was a defiance of the General Assembly's
promulgation as set forth in the State Ethics Act and the Supreme Court's
affirmance of that law. You argue only that you disagree with the concepts of
the Ethics Act and in no other way contest the facts or laws as applied. As
such, we believe that we must deny your request for reconsideration.
In addition to the foregoing, we feel that it is important to note that
the regulations of the State Ethics Commission also provide as follows:
§2.38.Finality, reconsideration.
(a) Orders disposing of a complaint or an
investigation shall be final within 15 days of service
thereof unless reconsideration is requested within that
time or the Commission orders release prior to finality..
51 Pa. Code 2.38(a).
The Order, in the instant matter, was issued on October 30, 198G. Your
request for reconsideration was received by this Commission on November 21,
1986. Your request for reconsideration was, thus, received 22 days after the
date of issuance and was not, in this respect, timely filed. Sees, DiGerlando,
346 -R. As Such, we will also deny your reconsideration requaE7,,t cn this
basis.
In light of the foregoing, the State Ethics i;ommission :oncludes that
your request for reconsideration must be DENIED,
John M. Allen, Jr.
Page 4
Accordingly, you have thirty (30) days from the date of this
Reconsideration denial to comply with the terms set forth in the original
Order. That Order and this decision denying reconsideration are final and
shall be made available as public documents on the 5th business day following
the date of this Order.
By the Commission,
0 0#v1•0"Ce-n a
G. Sieber Pancoast
Chairman
John M. Allen, Jr.
Box 464
Saxonburg, PA 16056
Re: Order 510, File 86 -046 -C
Dear Mr. Allen:
J.IC /na
cc: Public Binder
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
February 6, 1987
On February 5, 1987, the State Ethics Commission approved your requested
payment method for reimbursing Clinton Township as required by Order 510.
We have forwarded your check in the amount of $350.00 to the township.
We will expect checks in the amount of $100.00 for 31 months beginning with
February, 1987 and a final payment in the amount of $120.03.
This letter will be part of the Order and a public record as such.
5' rely,
ohn" J. .nt
Exec ive Director