HomeMy WebLinkAbout723-R ShookRe: 88 -111 -C
Dear Shook:
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
HARRISBURG, PENNSYLVANIA 17120
RECONSIDERATION ORDER OF THE COMMISSION
Order No. 723 -R
Before: Helena G. Hughes, Chair
Robert W. Brown, Vice Chair
G. Sieber Pancoast
Dennis C. Harrington
James M. Howley
Date Decided: October 26, 1989
Date Mailed: Nnwwember 8, 1989
Mr. Robert Shook
c/o Mr. Dennis Govochini
P.O. Box 217
311 -312 First United Federal Bldg.
Ebensburg, PA 15931
This refers to the request for Reconsideration presented on
October 11, 1989, with respect to the above - captioned Order
issued on September 28, 1989 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.
Mr. Robert Shook
Page 2
The Commission, having reviewed your request, must DENY your
request because none of these circumstances is present.
The sole basis for your request for reconsideration relates
to one sentence in the Discussion portion of the Order: "As to
the PSATS Convention, you were overpaid by $133.80 which you
returned to the township."
After noting that the payments in question relate to the
1987 PSAT Convention which was held in Pittsburgh between April
12th and 15th, 1987, you request deletion of the sentence based
on the assertion that you became aware at that time "of not being
entitled to flat rate per diem plus mileage and the necessity for
receipts - - -." Although check dated April 8, 1987 in the amount
of $340.00 was received by you, you indicate that you
"return[ed)" $133.80 by personal check on April 21, 1987.
You seek deletion of that phrase on the theory that the
above actions did not constitute receipt of excess funds.
Clearly, your argument does not rise to the level of meeting
any of the three criteria necessary for the grant of
reconsideration, but merely challenges the phraseology of the
Order. The fact that you received $340.00 and returned $133.80
is correctly reflected in the Order; these facts were stipulated
to in the submitted findings.
In light of the foregoing, the State Ethics Commission
concludes that your request for reconsideration must be DENIED.
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 fifth (5th) business day following the date of
this Order.
By t'e Commission,
i
elena G. Hughes
Chair
STATE ETHICS COMMISSION
308 FINANCE BUILDING
P.O. BOX 11470
HARRISBURG, PA 17108 -1470
TELEPHONE (717) 783 -1610
September 25, 1989
Mr. Robert Shook
c/o Dennis Govachini, Esquire
P.O. Box 217
311 -312 First United Federal Bldg.
Ebensburg, PA 15931
Re: 88 -111 -C
Dear Mr. Shook:
On September 21, 1989, the State Ethics Commission received
your payment for reimbursing Cambria Township as required by the
State Ethics Commission.
When the State Ethics Commission issues an Order in this
case, we will forward your check No. 2584 dated September 6,
1989, in the amount of $172.00 to Cambria Township.
This letter will be part of the Order and a public record as
such.
JJC /na
Sin
J. on i
Execu ive Director