HomeMy WebLinkAbout1203 CookIn Re: Charles H. Cook
File Docket:
X -ref:
Date Decided:
Date Mailed:
Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair
Louis W. Fryman, Vice Chair
John J. Bolger
Frank M. Brown
Susan Mosites Bicket
Donald M. McCurdy
00- 019 -C2
Order No. 1203
6/27/01
7/3/01
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 et seq., by the above -named Respondent. At the commencement of its
investigation, the Investigative Division served upon Respondent written notice of the specific
allegation(s). Upon completion of its investigation, the Investigative Division issued and served
upon Respondent a Findings Report identified as an "Investigative Complaint." An Answer was not
timely filed and a hearing was deemed waived. The record is complete.
Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter 11 of Act
93 of 1998, 65 Pa.C.S. §1101 et seq., which essentially repeats Act 9 of 1989 and provides for the
completion of pending matters under Act 93 of 1998.
This adjudication of the State Ethics Commission is issued under Act 93 of 1998 and 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 Chapter 11 of Act 93 of
1998. Any person who violates confidentiality of the Ethics Act is guilty of a misdemeanor subject to
a fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment for not more than one year. Confidentiality does not
preclude discussing this case with an attorney at law.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 2 of 31
I. ALLEGATION:
That Charles Cook, a public official /public employee, in his capacity as a sews e
enforcement officer for Franklin Township, Susquehanna County, violated Sections 3(a)/1103 a)
and 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act (Act 93 of 1998) when he used the authority of his office for t e
private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or members of his immediate family by recommending to
applicants that he and /or his daughter perform sewer system designs; when he approved septic
system design completed by his daughter and him in his capacity as sewage enforcement officer;
and when he used the authority of his office to obtain business contracts for his private home
construction business; and when he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with Jessup
Township for calendar years 1995 through 1999, Friendsville Borough for calendar years 1995
through 1999 and New Milford Township for calendar years 1997 and 1998.
II. FINDINGS:
1. The Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission received a signed, sworn
complaint alleging that Charles Cook violated provisions of the State Ethics Act (Act 93 of
1998).
2. Upon review of the complaint the Investigative Division initiated a preliminary inquiry on
March 29, 2000.
3. The preliminary inquiry was completed within sixty days.
4. On May 25, 2000, a letter was forwarded to Charles Cook by 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. 7099 3400 0012 4638 4398.
b. The domestic return receipt bore the signature of Grace Bush, with a delivery date of
May 27, 2000.
5. On May 16, 2001, a letter was forwarded to Charles Cook by the State Ethics Commission
informing him that additional allegations were being reviewed by the Investigative Division.
a. Said letter was forwarded by certified mail no. 7000 1670 0005 2770 2295.
6. On September 5, 2000, the Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission filed an
application for a ninety day extension of time to complete the Investigation.
7. The Commission issued an order on October 5, 2000, granting the ninety day extension.
8. On November 22, 2000, the Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission filed an
application for a ninety day extension of time to complete the Investigation.
9. The Commission issued an order on December 12, 2000, granting the ninety day extension.
10. Periodic notice letters were forwarded to Cook in accordance with the provisions of the
Ethics Law advising him of the general status of the investigation.
11. The Investigative Complaint was mailed to the Respondent on May 16, 2001.
12. Charles Cook served as Sewage Enforcement Officer (SEO) for Franklin, Jessup,
Middletown, Bridgewater, New Milford and Silver Lake Townships and Montrose and
Friendsville Boroughs in Susquehanna County.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 3 of 31
a. Cook served as SEO for Franklin Township from January 6, 1992, until March 12,
1999.
b. Cook served as SEO for Jessup Township from January 2, 1992, until March 12,
1999.
c. Cook served as SEO for Middletown Township from May 4, 1998, until March 12,
1999.
d. Cook served as SEO for Bridgewater Township from January 6, 1992, until March
12, 1999.
e. Cook served as SEO for New Milford Township from July 9, 1997, until March 12,
1999.
f. Cook served as SEO for Silver Lake Township from October 1, 1990, until March 12,
1999.
g.
h.
Cook served as SEO for Montrose Borough from July 5, 1994, until March 12, 1999.
Cook served as SEO for Friendsville Borough from at least 1994 until March 12,
1999.
13. Charles Cook was a certified Sewage Enforcement Officer in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania from May 17, 1990, until March 12, 1999.
a. Cook's Sewage Enforcement Officer Certification No. was 2283.
14. Sewage Enforcement Officers are empowered to administer and enforce the Pennsylvania
Sewage Facilities Act ("Sewage Enforcement Act "), Act of January 24, 1966, P.L. (1965)
1535, as amended, 35 P.S. §750.1 et seq.; the Clean Streams Law, Act of June 22, 1937,
P.L. 1987, as amended, 35 P.S. 691.1 et seq.; Section 1917 -A of the Administrative Code
of 1929, Act of April 9, 1929, P.C. 177, as amended, 71 P.S. §510 -17; and the rules and
regulations promulgated there under, under the overall supervision of the Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection.
a. Cook's powers and duties as Sewage Enforcement Officer included the power and
duty to issue, deny, revoke permits and issue permits only within the jurisdiction of the
local agency in which he was employed as sewage enforcement officer.
15. Regulations governing the conduct of SEOs are found in 25 Pa. Code §72.41, Powers and
Duties of Sewage Enforcement Officers.
a. Section 72.41 subsections (g), (h), (i), (j), and (k) relate to conflicts of interest and
include the following language:
(g) A sewage enforcement officer may not plan, design, construct, sell, or
install an individual or community on lot sewage system within the geographic
boundaries of the sewage enforcement officer's authority, as specified by the
local agency.
(h) A sewage enforcement officer may not, orally, or in writing, suggest,
recommend or require the use of any particular consultant, soil scientist or
professional engineer, or any individual or firm providing these services where
the services may be required or are subject to review under this article.
(i) A sewage enforcement officer may not perform consulting or design
work or related services required or regulated under this act, within the
municipality or local agency by which the officer is employed or which the
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 4 of 31
officer has a contractual relationship unless the services are set in the fee
schedule of the local agency, the fees are paid directly to the local agency and
products relating to consultation or design work are reviewed by and any
subsequent permit is issued by another sewage enforcement officer employed
by or under contract with the same local agency.
(j) A sewage enforcement officer may not conduct a test, issue a permit,
participate in the official processing of an application or official review of a
planning module for an individual or community on lot sewage system which
the sewage enforcement officer, a relative of the sewage enforcement officer,
a business associate of the sewage enforcement officer, or an employee of
the sewage enforcement officer, other than the local agency, has a financial
interest.
(k) For purposes of subsection (j), a financial interest includes full or partial
ownership, agreement or option to purchase, leasehold, mortgage or another
financial or proprietary interest in; or serving as an officer, director, employee,
contractor, consultant, or other legal fiduciary representative of a corporation,
partnership, joint venture or other legal entity which has a proprietary interest
in one or more of the following:
One or more lots to be served by the system.
ii. The development of the sale of the lots to be served by the
system.
A contract, either written or oral, to perform a service or
development of one or more of the lots to be served by the
system. The service may be before or after the fact of
development and may include professional as well as other
services.
iv. A contract, either written or oral to sell, plan, design, construct,
install or provide materials or component parts for the system.
16. Cook was made aware of conflict of interest provisions contained in Chapter 72.41, outlined
in Finding No. 15, as part of an administrative conference held with DEP Water Quality
Management Division on June 26, 1992.
a. Administrative conferences are DEP's rocedure for handling issues which could
result in sanctions being imposed by DEP against a sewage enforcement officer for
conflict of interest issues.
17. The June 26, 1992, administrative conference, concerned allegations that Cook issued a
Liberty Township sewage permit to James Pignatelli even though he was not employed as
that municipality's sewage enforcement officer.
a. DEP concluded that no willful violation of Chapter 72.41(b) was intended on Cook's
part.
b. During the proceedings, it was learned that Cook's daughter designed the on lot
sewer system as part of the Pignatelli permit application.
1. Cook, in his capacity as SEO, approved the system design prepared by his
daughter.
c. Cook was informed by DEP of the conflict of interest provisions of Chapter 72.41(e),
(f), (g), and (h) as it related to the situation of approving permits based on systems
designed by his daughter.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 5 of 31
d. Cook was directed not to engage in duties of a sewage enforcement officer where a
conflict of interest did or will occur, including approving system designs submitted by
a family member.
18. Tricia L. DeWitt is Charles Cook's daughter.
a. DeWitt has been a resident of New Hampshire since at least November 13, 1995,
with a mailing address of 171 Route 140, Lot 8, Belmont, New Hampshire.
b. DeWitt is not a licensed SEO or engineer.
c. DeWitt does not have a physical business location in Pennsylvania.
d. DeWitt did not advertise, in any area where Cook serves as SEO, her services as a
septic system designer.
19. A second administrative conference was conducted by Richard A. Sabulski, Water Quality
Specialist, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection with Cook on February 24,
1999.
a. The reason for this administrative conference was a complaint DEP received
regarding Cook's contract to construct a home on the property of Harold Rinko,
Franklin Township, Susquehanna County, during the time period that Cook was
conducting site testing for the on -lot sewage disposal permit for Rinko's lot.
20. During the February 24, 1999, administrative conference, Cook admitted to DEP personnel,
infractions which resulted in his decertification as a sewage enforcement officer effective
March 12, 1999.
a. Cook admitted to not submitting pink copies of permits to DEP as required to avoid
having pink copies of permits reviewed by department personnel as required.
b. Cook admitted to allowing his daughter to do all design work of systems for which he
issued permits after being made aware of a conflict of interest at a 1992
administrative conference.
c. Cook also admitted to performing construction work on a septic system which
evidence indicated was also a conflict of interest (as detailed in revocation letter).
21. Based on the February 24, 1999, hearing, Cook received an overall rating of inadequate by
DEP with a subsequent revocation of his Sewage Enforcement Officer license.
a. Cook did not appeal his decertification as a SEO.
b. DEP did not review Cook's involvement in any other sewer permits issued since his
June 26, 1992, administrative conference.
22. DEP's March 12, 1999, decertification of Cook related to his action on permit no. 0 -10951
issued [to] Harold Rinko for property located in Franklin Township, Susquehanna County, on
September 21, 1996.
23. Between 1995 and 1999 Cook issued new and repair sewer permits for the following
municipalities in Susquehanna County.
New Repair
Middletown Township 2 0
Friendsville Borough 2 0
Jessup Township 4 1
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 6 of 31
Franklin Township
Bridgewater Township
Silver Lake Township
New Milford Township
24. Cook did not issue any sewer permits in his capacity as SEO for Montrose Borough,
Susquehanna County.
a. Montrose Borough retained Cook as SEO but did not use his services.
25. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Middletown Township, Susquehanna County,
issued the following two (2) sewer permits between September 11, 1998, and December 24,
1998.
Owner
Thomas Davis
DJO Holding Corp. 12/24/98 Q -50861
26. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Friendsville Borough, Susquehanna County, issued
the following two (2) sewer permits between March 1, 1997, and August 5, 1998.
Owner
Peter Gervasi
Herbert Wood
27. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Jessup Township, Susquehanna County, issued the
following five (5) sewer permits between June 28, 1995, and April 27, 1998.
Owner
Bruce Koegler
William &
Madeline Fitzpatrick
Dale Severcool
Scott Griffith
William Brennan
Owner
Marian Bolles
Donna Fekette
Raymond & Sally
Weber
Mark Caterson
Daniel Boldt
Maurice Roszel
Susan Newhart
Richard Stofyra
Neil Franc
Thomas McCabes
Richard Neiderberger
Harold Rinko
Permit Date Permit No.
09/11/98 Q -50850
Permit Date Permit No.
03/01/97 0 -10960
08/05/98 P -50638
Permit Date
06/28/95
07/10/96
10/04/97
11/28/97
04/27/98
31
33
23
117
Permit No.
N -25921
0 -10993
0 -10949
P -50603
P -50616
28. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Franklin Township, Susquehanna County, issued
the following forty (40) sewer permits between March 29, 1995, and February 17, 1999:
Permit Date Permit Number System
03/29/95
05/25/95
05/24/95
06/12/95
07/10/95
07/12/95
07/06/95
08/03/95
09/06/95
10/28/95
08/31/96
09/21/96
N25940
N25905
N25903
N25904
N25909
N25919
N25914
N25920
N25970
N25972
N25963
010999
010951
9
14
18
52
System
New
New
System
New
New
System
New
Repair
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
New
Repair
New
Repair
New
New
New
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 7 of 31
Joyce Brunel) 01/10/96 N25961 New
Mark &
Melinda Novakowski 03/15/96 010977 New
Edward Montross 03/04/96 N25956 Repair
Dave Wood 05/18/96 010984 New
Stephen Major 05/16/96 010983 New
Julia Sterling 08/07/96 010998 Repair
Bryan Birtch 08/07/96 010998 Repair
Frances Wheeler 11/02/96 010958 New
Sally Mailiri 11/01/96 010956 Repair
Salt Springs State Park 10/28/96 010954 New
James Anderson 03/22/97 010961 New
Skip Tracy 04/18/97 010964 New
Robert Thomas 06/09/97 N25957 New
William White 07/22/97 010925 New
Michael Bosi 07/25/97 010929 New
Arthur Bolles 07/26/97 010931 Repair
Sharon Porter 04/29/98 P50619 New
Nancy Buxbaum 03/30/98 P50612 New
Joseph Devito 06/29/97 P50629 Repair
Samuel Little 06/12/98 P50628 Repair
Barry Schmidt 06/11/98 P50627 New
Jerry Gorski 07/30/98 P50637 New
Brian Cobb 08/24/98 P50640 New
Debra Honeyford 09/17/98 Q50853 New
Nancy Foster 09/19/98 Q50854 New
Abram Herberle 02/17/99 Q50870 New
Donald Crawford 02/08/99 Q50868 New
29. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Bridgewater Township, Susquehanna County,
issued the following forty -seven (47) sewer permits between March 21, 1995, and March 12,
1999:
Owner Permit Date Permit No. System
Charles G. Chapel 03/21/95 N25938 New
Scott Salsman 04/04/95 N25942 New
Robert Tomaszewski 04/15/95 N25944 New
Daniel A. Hearn 03/29/95 N25941 New
Donna Doyle/
Ed Kazmienski 03/28/95 N22848 New
Mary J. Wilson 03/01/95 N25935 New
Charles & Barbara
Lauch 05/18/95 N25949 New
Orton Myers 05/12/95 N25901 Repair
James B. Considine 06/20/95 N25922 Repair
David Hart 06/20/95 N25912 Repair
Lauren C. Hertzler 06/28/95 N25913 Repair
Jim Baker 07/20/95 N25916 New
Gary Parris 07/25/95 N25950 New
Wesley Goff 09/14/95 N25969 New
Hugh McCullum 09/20/95 N25968 Repair
Todd White 09/13/95 N25971 Repair
Thomas C. Lewis 08/07/95 N25951 New
(Property Montrose /Bridgewater)
George E. Ely 10/12/95 N25967 New
Louis W. Hanley 10/26/95 N25962 Repair
PennDOT 08/30/95 N25948 New
Wallington Simpson 09/22/95 N25966 New
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 8 of 31
John E. Watts 11/19/95 N25958 New
David Robinson 03/08/96 010976 New
William Lewis 03/23/96 010978 New
Charles Mead 04/25/96 010980 Repair
David Cavanaugh 05/22/96 010986 Repair
Thomas Ferme 06/15/96 010990 New
Edward Tunilo 08/14/96 010995 New
John Castrogiavanno 09/09/96 N25975 Repair
Melissa Hitchcock 10/10/96 010952 New
Mahlon Winkle Blech 11/01/96 010957 Repair
Roy Teets 08/18/97 010934 New
Gary & Jill Yaeger 11/18/97 P50601 New
Jody McCourt 10/24/97 P50600 New
Farley Fowler 10/08/97 010947 New
Jay Birtch 09/22/97 010940 Repair
Mark Carlton 07/24/97 010928 New
Scott Andre 07/24/97 010927 New
Donald O'Brien, Jr. 06/19/97 010970 Repair
Lee Hunsberger 05/12/98 P50622 New
Edward Ayers 02/17/98 P50606 New
Steve Lathrop 03/21/98 P50610 New
John Brewer 06/29/98 P50630 New
Anna Maria
Bakerman 09/30/98 Q50858 New
Patrick Carricato 09/26/98 Q50857 New
East Bridgewater
Church 11/13/98 Q50860 Repair
30. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for Silver Lake Township, Susquehanna County,
issued the following forty -one (41) sewer permits between March 21, 1995, and January 20,
1999:
Owner
Permit Date Permit No. System
Christian
Hammerslag 03/21/95 N -25939 Repair
Richard Rossman 04/22/95 N -25945 New
Joan Webster 05/31/95 N -25907 Repair
Peter &
Katherine Bouman 06/12/95 N -25908 New
Cathy Fink 06/23/95 N -25923 Repair
Jim Reynolds 05/21/95 N -25902 New
Phillip Strawn 04/05/95 N -25943 New
Edwin A. Hall II 09/20/95 N -25953 New
Edward J. McKenna 09/26/95 N -25954 New
Micky Perinach 08/08/95 N -25952 Repair
Stan Pierson 08/12/95 N -25974 New
Jane Doherty 10/19/95 N -25964 Repair
Steve Witmore 10/29/96 0 -10955 Repair
Cathy Cornell 04/09/96 0 -10979 New
Chad Riselman 05/02/96 0 -10981 New
Steve Chaszar 05/06/96 0 -10982 Repair
Dennis Stewart 05/18/96 0 -10985 Repair
Daryl Mathers 06/01/96 0 -10987 Repair
Jim Thomas 06/15/96 0 -10989 New
Bruce Gardner 07/27/96 0 -10997 New
Tim Johnson 07/03/96 0 -10992 New
Michael Hester 07/23/96 0 -10996 New
Jeff West 12/15/97 P -50605 New
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 9 of 31
Dewitt Darron 08/20/97 0 -10936 Repair
Dominic L. Delousia 06/19/97 0 -10971 New
Brian Seleg 05/27/97 0 -10968 Repair
James P. May 05/08/97 0 -10967 Repair
James Taylor 07/24/97 0 -10926 Repair
Richard Van Auken 06/26/97 0 -10972 New
Thomas Swan 04/24/97 0 -10965 Repair
Kirk Van Zandbergen 04/25/97 0 -10966 Repair
David Culp 01/15/97 0 -10959 New
Josh Barnes 07/20/98 P -50633 New
Fred Rathbone 05/07/98 P -50620 Repair
Ronald Streator 03/10/98 P -50609 New
Virginia Carey 09/16/98 Q -50852 Repair
Stanley Anderson 09/12/98 Q -50851 New
Michael Adams 08/29/98 P -50646 New
Keith Griffiths 04/15/98 P -50613 Repair
Mark Derwin 02/20/99 Q -50871 New
Steve Nagy 01/20/99 Q -50864 New
31. Cook, in his official capacity as SEO for New Milford Township, Susquehanna County,
issued the following thirty -four (34) sewer permits between July 25, 1997, and December 13,
1998:
Owner Permit Date Permit No. System
Scott T. Young 07/25/97 0 -10930 Repair
Jeffrey J. Kaminski 08/08/97 0 -10933 New
Deborah S. Alt 08/18/97 0 -10935 New
Samuel Cosmello 09/19/97 0 -10938 New
Bill Holbrook 08/08/97 0 -10932 New
Joe Biggica 09/30/97 0 -10941 New
0 -10942 New
0 -10943 New
0 -10944 New
0 -10945 New
Kevin Bunn 11/19/97 P -50602 New
Bark Em Squirrel
Camp 10/24/97 P -50604 New
Michael J. Gathany 01/06/98 0 -10937 New
John Brozoskie 03/01/98 P -50607 New
E. Anthony Dubyk 04/19/98 P -50614 New
Salt Lick Rod & Gun 04/29/98 P -50617 Repair
Anna Pilgeo 04/29/98 P -50618 New
Lynn Joines 05/12/98 P -50621 New
Cindy Kovalefsky 06/11/98 P -50626 Repair
Robert Jalbert 06/11/98 P -50625 New
James G. Burnett 07/08/98 P -50631 New
Charles R. Canfield 07/16/98 P -50632 Repair
Larry Morano 05/12/98 P -50624 New
Robert Billmers 08/01/98 P -50639 New
reissue of
N -25659
Robert H. Kerr 08/24/98 P -50643 Repair
Endless Mountain
Recreation, Inc. 08/26/98 P -50644 New
(Michael R. Hansel)
Joseph C. Garrity 08/27/98 P -50645 Repair
Natural Land
Preservation Corp. 09/01/98 P -50648 New
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 10 of 31
Kristen Armetta 02/03/99 Q -50867 Repair
James Williams 01/25/99 Q -50865 New
Thomas J. O'Reilly 12/13/98 Q -50863 Repair
Margaret S. Graf 09/24/98 Q -50856 Repair
James E. Dougerty 09/21/98 Q -50855 New
Eugene & Kathy
Paumgardher 10/14/98 Q -50859 Repair
32. Property owners seeking to install on -lot sewage systems are required to submit applications
to the municipality where the property is located.
a. Applications are usually submitted to the municipality's sewage enforcement officer.
b. Prior to submitting an application, the applicant must determine the suitability of the
site for the on -lot system.
1. This is done by conducting a percolation test of the soil.
33. Applications for sewage ermits are to include percolation test results, system design
drawings and a completed permit application.
a. System design drawings are to be completed by persons knowledgeable in on -lot
sewage system design.
34. The sewage enforcement officer is responsible for the following once an application for a
sewage permit is received.
a. Confirm all tests used to determine suitability of a site for an on -lot sewage system.
1. This will include going to the site to meet with the applicant.
b. Confirm that the application is complete and that the proposed system design is in
compliance with legal requirements.
1. This will include going to the site to meet with the applicant prior to issuance of
the permit.
c. Give timely written notice to the applicant or permittee of approval, denial or
revocation of a permit.
d. Submit the application and permit to DEP and the municipality.
35. An approved septic system design drawing is required for a permit to be issued for a new
septic system.
a. The SEO is responsible for identifying the type of system needed.
b. The SEO is responsible for approving septic system design drawings.
c. Septic system design drawings do not have to be prepared by a licensed SEO or
engineer.
36. The Susquehanna County Council of Governments (COG) has a sewer committee which
handles the issuance of sewer permits for member municipalities.
a. COG's Sewer Committee records includes a list of thirteen (13) individuals who can
be used to do septic system design drawings.
b. Charles R. Cook, RR 6, Box 6037, Montrose, PA 18801 is listed as a system
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 11 of 31
designer.
c. Tricia DeWitt and /or T. L. DeWitt Designs is not included on this list.
d. Property owners are not required to use a system designer from COG's Sewer
Committee List.
e. All design drawings must meet with the approval of the SEO issuing the sewer permit.
37. Cook's compensation as Sewage Enforcement Officer was based on fee schedules set by
each municipality.
a. All fee schedules were based on site inspections, issuance of permits and system
tests.
1. Fees varied by municipality.
b. No fees were to be paid to Cook by applicants or permittees.
38. Of the 117 permits issued for new systems by Cook, six (6) had the required design
drawings attached or the designer's name identified on the permit.
a. Two (2) of the six (6) designs were completed by the state for state facilities.
b. The remaining four (4) designs were noted as being completed by T. L. DeWitt
Designs.
c. T. L. DeWitt is Cook's daughter.
39. T. L. DeWitt Designs is not a business entity in Pennsylvania.
a. Tricia DeWitt has operated a business known as Tricia's Craftroom in Belmont, New
Hampshire since at least 1996.
40. Information relating to the four permits issued by Cook which contained system design
drawings prepared by his daughter, T. L. DeWitt, are outlined below:
a. Cook issued permit number N25963 to Thomas McCabes on October 28, 1995, in
his capacity as Franklin Township SEO. Attached to McCabes' permit was design
drawings done by T. L. DeWitt Design dated October 28, 1995.
b. Cook issued permit number 0 -10928 to Mark Carlton on July 24, 1997, in his
capacity as SEO for Bridgewater Township. Attached to this permit was design
drawings for an elevated sand mound septic system prepared by T. L. DeWitt
Designs on July 12, 1997.
c. Cook issued permit number P50630 to John Brewer in his capacity as SEO for
Bridgewater Township on June 29, 1998. Attached to this permit was design
drawings for an elevated sand mound septic system prepared by T. L. DeWitt
Designs on June 27, 1998.
d. Cook issued permit number N25916 to James Baker in his capacity as SEO for
Bridgewater Township on July 20, 1995. This permit contains the signature of Tricia
L. DeWitt as system designer on July 20, 1995. No design drawings were included
with this permit.
41. The four individuals who utilized Tricia DeWitt for system designs did so after being advised
by Charles Cook that his daughter, Tricia DeWitt, did such work.
a. Cook advised the applicants of his daughter doing design work during meetings when
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 12 of 31
applicants were obtaining information regarding the sewer permit process.
a. Prior to discussions with Cook, the applicants were not aware of Tricia DeWitt or that
she performed design work.
b. At the time of the designs for Permit No. -10928 and P50630, Tricia DeWitt was not a
resident of Pennsylvania.
42. Charles Cook reviewed and approved the four design drawings completed by his daughter.
43. No design drawings were included with any of the remaining 111 permits issued by Cook in
Silver Lake, Jessup, New Milford and Middletown Townships or Friendsville Borough.
a. Cook did not issue any sewer permits on behalf of Montrose Borough.
44. Cook's failure to file required permit design drawings with DEP concealed the fact that Cook
and /or DeWitt were performing the system design work as part of permits Cook issued.
a. Cook regularly omitted the name of the system designer and design plans on permits
he filed with municipalities and DEP.
b. Cook admitted to not submitting records to DEP as required to avoid having his
permits reviewed by DEP personnel.
45. Section III of the permit application requires completion of a plot plan and system design.
a. On permits issued with a revision date of 11/93 the system designer's signature was
required along with the following certification: "to the best of my knowledge the design
of the system to be installed on this property complies with the technical standards at
25 Pa Code Chapter 73."
47.
Owner
b. Permits with a revision date of 4/95 no longer required the designer's signature but
did require the following documentation to be attached: "a detailed plot plan sewage
system design including plan reviews and cross sections."
46. With the exception of the permits listed in Finding No. 39, Cook did not comply with the
requirements that a plot plan and system design be submitted.
a. Cook failed to comply with these requirements at least 111 times between March 21,
1995, and March 12, 1999.
Cook issued 117 sewage permits to the following applicants between March 1995 and
February 1999.
Mary J. Wilson 03/01/95
Charles G. Chapel 03/21/95
Donna Doyle /Ed Kazmienski 03/28/95
Marian Bolles
Daniel A. Hearn
Scott Salsman
Phillip Strawn
Robert Tomaszewski
Richard Rossman
Charles & Barbara Rauch
Jim Reynolds
Raymond & Sally Weber
Donna Fekette
Permit Date Permit Number
N25935
N25938
N22848
03/29/95 N25940
03/29/95 N25941
04/04/95 N25942
04/05/95 N -25943
04/15/95 N25944
04/22/95 N -25945
05/18/95 N25949
05/21/95 N -25902
05/24/95 N25904
05/25/95 N25905
Municipality Designed By
Bridgewater Unknown
Bridgewater Unknown
Bridgewater Unknown
Franklin Other /Unknown
Bridgewater Cook
Bridgewater Unknown
Silver Lake Builder
Bridgewater Unknown
Silver Lake DeWitt
Bridgewater DeWitt
Silver Lake Unknown
Franklin Unknown
Franklin DeWitt
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 13 of 31
N25903
Peter & Katherine Bouman 06/12/95 N -25908 Silver Lake DeWitt
Mark Caterson 06/12/95 N25909 Franklin Unknown
Bruce Koegler 06/28/95 N -25921 Jessup DeWitt
Daniel Boldt 07/10/95 N25919 Franklin Unknown
Maurice Roszel 07/12/95 N25914 Franklin Unknown
Jim Baker 07/20/95 N25916 Bridgewater DeWitt
Gary Parrish 07/25/95 N25950 Bridgewater DeWitt
Richard Stofyra 08/03/95 N25970 Franklin Cook
Thomas C. Lewis 08/07/95 N25951 Bridgewater DeWitt
Stan Pierson 08/12/95 N -25974 Silver Lake DeWitt
PennDOT 08/30/95 N25948 Bridgewater PennDOT
Wesley Goff 09/14/95 N25969 Bridgewater DeWitt
Edwin A. Hall II 09/20/95 N -25953 Silver Lake DeWitt
Wallington Simpson 09/22/95 N25966 Bridgewater Unknown
Edward J. McKenna 09/26/95 N -25954 Silver Lake DeWitt
George E. Ely 10/12/95 N25967 Bridgewater Unknown
Thomas McCabes 10/28/95 N25963 Franklin DeWitt
John E. Watts 11/19/95 N25958 Bridgewater Cook
Joyce Brunel) 01/10/96 N25961 Franklin DeWitt
David Robinson 03/08/96 010976 Bridgewater Warner
Mark & Melinda Novakowski 03/15/96 010977 Franklin Unknown
William Lewis 03/23/96 010978 Bridgewater Cook
Cathy Cornell 04/09/96 0 -10979 Silver Lake Unknown
Chad Riselman 05/02/96 0 -10981 Silver Lake Unknown
Stephen Major 05/16/96 010983 Franklin Unknown
Dave Wood 05/18/96 010984 Franklin DeWitt
Jim Thomas 06/15/96 0 -10989 Silver Lake Unknown
Thomas Ferme 06/15/96 010990 Bridgewater Unknown
Tim Johnson 07/03/96 0 -10992 Silver Lake Unknown
Michael Hester 07/23/96 0 -10996 Silver Lake DeWitt
Bruce H. Gardner 07/27/96 0 -10997 Silver Lake DeWitt
Edward Tunilo 08/14/96 010995 Bridgewater Unknown
Richard Neiderberger 08/31/96 010999 Franklin Unknown
Harold Rinko 09/21/96 010951 Franklin DeWitt
Melissa Hitchcock 10/10/96 010952 Bridgewater DeWitt
Salt Springs State Park 10/28/96 010954 Franklin State
Frances Wheeler 11/02/96 010958 Franklin DeWitt
David Culp 01/15/97 0 -10959 Silver Lake Cook
Peter Gervasi 03/01/97 0 -10960 Friendsville Wood
James Anderson 03/22/97 010961 Franklin DeWitt
Skip Tracy 04/18/97 010964 Franklin Cook/DeWitt
Robert Thomas 06/09/97 N25957 Franklin Unknown
Dominic L. Delousia 06/19/97 0 -10971 Silver Lake DeWitt
Richard Van Auken 06/26/97 0 -10972 Silver Lake DeWitt
William White 07/22/97 010925 Franklin Unknown
Mark Carlton 07/24/97 010928 Bridgewater DeWitt
Scott Andre 07/24/97 010927 Bridgewater DeWitt
Michael Bosi 07/25/97 010929 Franklin Unknown
Jeffrey J. Kaminski 08/08/97 0 -10933 New Milford Unknown
Bill Holbrook 08/08/97 0 -10932 New Milford Unknown
Deborah S. Alt 08/18/97 0 -10935 New Milford Darrow
Roy Teets 08/18/97 010934 Bridgewater Unknown
Samuel Cosmello 09/19/97 0 -10938 New Milford DeWitt
Joe Biggica 09/30/97 0 -10941 New Milford None
0 -10942
0 -10943
0 -10944
0 -10945
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 14 of 31
Dale Severcool
Farley Fowler
Bark Em Squirrel Camp
Jody McCourt
Gary & Jill Yaeger
Kevin Bunn
Scott Griffith
Jeff West
Michael J. Gathany
Edward Ayers
John Brozoskie
Ronald Streator
Steve Lathrop
Nancy Buxbaum
E. Anthony Dubyk
William Brennan
Anna Pilgeo
Sharon Porter
Lynn Joines
Larry Morano
Lee Hunsberger
Robert Jalbert
Barry Schmidt
John Brewer
James G. Burnett
Josh Barnes
Jerry Gorski
Robert Billmers
Herbert Wood
Brian Cobb
Endless Mountain
Recreation, Inc.
Michael Adams
Natural Land Preservation
Corp.
Thomas Davis
Stanley Anderson
Debra Honeyford
Nancy Foster
James E. Dougerty
Patrick Carricato
Anna Maria Bakermans
DJO Holding Corp.
Steve Nagy
James Williams
Donald Crawford
Abram Herberle
Mark Derwin
10/04/97 0 -10949
10/08/97 010947
10/24/97 P -50604
10/24/97 P50600
11/18/97 P50601
11/19/97 P -50602
11/28/97 P -50603
12/15/97 P -50605
01/06/98 0 -10937
02/17/98 P50606
03/01/98 P -50607
03/10/98 P -50609
3/21/98 P50610
03/30/98 P50612
04/19/98 P -50614
04/27/98 P -50616
04/29/98 P -50618
04/29/98 P50619
05/12/98 P -50621
05/12/98 P -50624
05/12/98 P50622
06/11/98 P -50625
06/11/98 P50627
06/29/98 P50630
07/08/98 P -50631
07/20/98 P -50633
07/30/98 P50637
08/01/98 P -50639
reissue of
N -25659
08/05/98 P -50638
08/24/98 P50640
08/26/98 P -50644
08/29/98 P -50646
09/01/98 P -50648
09/11/98 Q -50850
09/12/98 Q -50851
09/17/98 Q50853
09/19/98 Q50854
09/21/98 Q -50855
09/26/98 Q50857
09/30/98 Q50858
12/24/98 Q50861
01/20/99 Q -50864
01/25/99 Q -50865
02/08/99 Q50868
02/17/99 Q50870
02/20/99 Q -50871
Jessup
Bridgewater
New Milford
Bridgewater
Bridgewater
New Milford
Jessup
Silver Lake
New Milford
Bridgewater
New Milford
Silver Lake
Bridgewater
Franklin
New Milford
Jessup
New Milford
Franklin
New Milford
New Milford
Bridgewater
New Milford
Franklin
Bridgewater
New Milford
Silver Lake
Franklin
New Milford
Friendsville
Franklin
New Milford
Silver Lake
New Milford
Middletown
Silver Lake
Franklin
Franklin
New Milford
Bridgewater
Bridgewater
Middletown
Silver Lake
New Milford
Franklin
Franklin
Silver Lake
DeWitt
Unknown
Unknown
Cook
Mrs. Cook
Lawrence
Cook
DeWitt
Schmidt
Unknown
Wood
Unknown
Cook
Unknown
DeWitt
Unknown
Unknown
DeWitt
DeWitt
Unknown
Darrow
Stevens
Schmidt
Unknown
DeWitt
DeWitt
Unknown
Harris
DeWitt
Cook
DeWitt
Unknown
Unknown
Cook
DeWitt
DeWitt
DeWitt
Darrow
DeWitt
DeWitt
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
DeWitt
DeWitt
Wood
48. Between May 1995 and January 1999, Charles Cook and /or Tricia DeWitt, Cook's daughter,
were responsible for completing septic system design drawings for at least fifty -seven (57) of
117 applicants for which Cook issued a sewer permit ... in his official capacity as an SEO.
49. Cook arranged for the system design drawings to be done while performing his official duties
as SEO.
a. Cook advised property owners that either he or his daughter would be able to do
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 15 of 31
design drawings.
50. Cook charged a minimum of $150.00 per set of drawings.
a. Cook directed property owners to make their checks payable either to himself or Tricia
DeWitt/T. L. DeWitt Designs.
51. Between May 18, 1995, and January 21, 1999, thirty -four (34) deposits totaling $5,150.00
for septic system design drawings were deposited in a personal bank [account] maintained
by Cook.
a. Checks were made payable to either Charles Cook, Tricia DeWitt or T. L. DeWitt
Designs.
b. All checks made payable to Tricia DeWitt or T. L. DeWitt Designs were deposited into
Cook's bank accounts.
52. The payments were for the drawings of system designs which were reviewed and approved
by Cook in his capacity as SEO.
a. Twenty -three (23) of the payments were made payable to Tricia DeWitt or T. L.
DeWitt Designs.
53. Cook deposited the following thirty -four (34) checks into his personal account number
100233981 maintained at Community Savings Bank for septic system design drawings.
Check Check
Date Number Amount
05/18/95* 395 $150.00
05/21/95* 409 $150.00
07/25/95* 1549 $150.00
07/09/95* 3508 $150.00
07/25/95* 8414 $150.00
08/05/95 3275 $150.00
08/28/95* 2785 $150.00
09/14/95* 413 $150.00
09/20/95* Starter $150.00
10/21/95* 1229 $150.00
06/20/96* 1999 $150.00
07/23/96* 247 $150.00
09/21/96* 6874 $200.00
03/23/97* 983 $150.00
06/24/97 1447 $150.00
07/07/97* 689 $150.00
07/22/97* 326 $150.00
09/18/97* 4396 $150.00
10/02/97* 2590 $150.00
10/31/97 2138 $150.00
11/21/97 0540 $150.00
11/24/97** 659 $505.00
07/08/98 417 $150.00
08/20/98 107 $150.00
08/22/98* 112 $150.00
08/24/98 462 $150.00
08/26/98* 2204 $150.00
09/19/98 2131 $150.00
09/17/98* 1244 $150.00
09/30/98* 294 $150.00
Name
Charles Rauch
James Reynolds
Stone & Parrish
Road Service
Bruce Koegler
Thomas Lewis
Richard A. Stofyra
Stanley R. Pierson
Westley Goff
Edwin Hall
Edward McKenna
Unknown Name
Michael Hester
Harold R. Rinko
James R. Anderson
John Klein
Richard A. VanAuken
Dominic L. Delousia
Sam Cosmello
Dale Severcool
David R. Culp
Scott M. Griffith
Jody McCourt
James G. Burnett
Larry Morano
Kurt /Susan Barnes
Kristine Cobb
Endless Mountain Rec.
Nancy Foster
Debra Honeyford
Anna Maria Bakerman
Design Notation
on Check
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 16 of 31
10/02/98*
01/03/99*
01/07/99
01/21/99
Client
Daniel Hearn
Richard Rossman
Peter Bouman
Jim Baker
Thomas McCabes
John E. Watts
Joyce Brunel)
William Lewis
Dave Wood
Melissa Hitchcock
Frances Wheeler
Mark Carlton
Scott Andre
Jill Yaeger
Jeff West
Steve Lathrop
Anthony Dubyk
Sharon Porter
Lynn Joines
Herbert Wood
Thomas Davis
Stanley Anderson
Abram Herberle
369
1023
1693
1442
$150.00
$150.00
$150.00
$150.00
Patrick Carricato
Donald Crawford
Karin E. Nagy
JD Williams & Assoc
No
Yes
No
Yes
*Denotes check made payable to Tricia DeWitt or T. L. Dewitt Designs
**A notation in the memo portion of Jody McCourt's check number 659 states perc test and sand
mound design. At least $150.00 of the $505.00 amount of this check was for system design plans.
54. Checks made payable to Tricia DeWitt and deposited into Cook's personal account no.
100233981 were for septic system design drawings.
55. Cook did not deposit all funds received for septic system drawings into his personal account.
a. Some payments were made to Cook in cash.
b. Some payments in the form of checks made payable to Cook also were cashed.
56. Cook received payments from the following twenty -three (23) individuals for system design
work which were not directly deposited into his personal account.
Permit
Date Permit No. Municipality Designer
03/29/95 N25941 Bridgewater Cook
04/22/95 N25945 Silver Lake DeWitt
06/12/95 N25908 Silver Lake DeWitt
07/20/95 N25916 Bridgewater DeWitt
10/28/95 N25963 Franklin DeWitt
11/19/95 N25958 Bridgewater Cook
01/10/96 N25961 Franklin DeWitt
03/23/96 010978 Bridgewater Cook
05/18/96 010984 Franklin DeWitt
10/10/96 010952 Bridgewater DeWitt
11/02/96 010958 Franklin DeWitt
07/24/97 010928 Bridgewater DeWitt
07/24/97 010927 Bridgewater DeWitt
11/18/97 P50601 Bridgewater Mrs. Cook
12/15/97 P50605 Silver Lake DeWitt
03/21/98 P50610 Bridgewater Cook
04/19/98 P50614 New Milford DeWitt
04/29/98 P50619 Franklin DeWitt
05/12/98 P50621 New Milford DeWitt
08/05/98 P50638 Friendsville DeWitt
09/11/98 Q50850 Middletown Cook
09/12/98 Q50851 Silver Lake DeWitt
02/17/99 Q50870 Franklin DeWitt
57. Cook accepted payments of $150.00 per system design drawing from each of the twenty -
three (23) individuals listed in the above Finding.
58. A total of $8,550 was paid to Charles Cook and Tricia DeWitt for the design of sewage
systems which were approved by Charles Cook in his capacity as SEO.
a. Thirty -four (34) of these payments totaling $5,100 were deposited into a personal
bank account controlled by Charles Cook.
b. Twenty -three payments totaling $3,450 were not deposited into any bank account.
59. Cook admitted to an investigator from the State Ethics Commission on April 26, 2001, that
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 17 of 31
the only payments he accepted and deposited into his personal account no. 100233981
were for septic system design drawings.
60. Charles Cook issued six checks from account no. 10023398, to Tricia DeWitt during the
period November 13, 1995, through March 15, 1999 for house and /or septic design work.
Check Date Amount Memo
940 05/30/96 $200.00 Kathy 0 Design
4201 06/15/97 $450.00 Rinko House Design
4302 09/01/97 $150.00 Severcool Design
4454 12/13/97 $250.00 House Design
4545 01/19/98 $150.00 Septic Design
4567 02/03/98 $300.00 House & Septic
Total $1,500.00
a. Of the $1,500 in checks issued to DeWitt, $650 was for sewer system design and
$850 was for house design.
61. Other checks issued from account no. 100233981 by Cook to Tricia DeWitt during this
period are as follows:
Check No. Date Amount Memo
714 11/13/95 $150.00 Blank
952 06/16/96 $250.00 Blank
4097 04/15/97 $300.00 Blank
4611 02/26/98 $ 75.00 Blank
4731 05/12/98 $800.00 Blank
4813 06/13/98 $150.00 Blank
4857 07/05/98 $300.00 Blank
5004 09/29/98 $150.00 Blank
Total $2,175.00
62. Charles Cook's checking account records reflect the following checks received from Merle
DeWitt and /or Tricia Dewitt during this same period.
Check No. Date Amount Memo Issued By
2190 03/24/98 $ 201.42 Van Parts Tricia DeWitt
2612 10/28/98 $1,420.00 Siding Merle DeWitt
2536 11/09/98 $1,000.00 Nothing Tricia DeWitt
2630 11/25/98 $ 300.00 Nothing Tricia DeWitt
2652 12/12/98 $1,500.00 Nothing Tricia DeWitt
Total $4,421.42
a. The five (5) payments from the DeWitt's to Charles Cook were issued from New
Hampshire Federal Credit Union, Concord, New Hampshire 03301, account No.
6097189. These checks contained the following account owner information:
Merle R. Dewitt, II
Tricia L. DeWitt
171 Rt. 140, Lot 8
Belmont, NH 03220
(603) 267 -8531
The following findings relate to allegations that Charles Cook used the authority of his
public position to obtain contracts for his private business.
63. Since at least 1996, Charles Cook has been self - employed as a homebuilder.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 18 of 31
64. Cook offered building services to people ... [to whom] he issued permits for on -lot septic
systems.
a. The solicitations by Cook to build homes occurred during the process when Cook
issued permits or inspected sites.
65. In or about August 1996 Harold Rinko met with Cook to obtain a sewer permit for property
Rinko was purchasing in Franklin Township.
a. Cook met Rinko at the property and the two discussed possible site locations for the
house, well and septic system.
b. Rinko explained to Cook that he was interested in either a two story or modular home.
c. During this meeting Cook advised Rinko that he builds approximately one or two
houses per year.
d. Rinko was receiving quotes from other builders at the time ranging between $90,000
and $100,000 for the actual construction work.
e. Cook quoted Rinko a price that was approximately $30,000 less than other builders.
f. Cook advised Rinko that he was helping his son get started in the building industry
and wasn't in it for the money.
g. Sometime between August and October 1996, Rinko entered into a contract with
Cook to construct a new house.
66. Prior to September 21, 1996, Cook told Rinko that a septic system design drawing would be
needed for his property.
a. Cook informed Rinko that his daughter, Tricia DeWitt, is a draftsman and does that
type of work.
b. Cook did not provide the names of any other individuals who could do a system
design drawing.
c. Cook told Rinko that he would handle the design and showed up at the Rinko
property with a completed drawing at a later date.
d. Rinko utilized the services of Cook and /or Tricia DeWitt for the design of his sewage
system.
67. Rinko issued personal check number 6874 in the amount of $200.00 on September 21,
1996, to T. L. DeWitt Designs.
a. Rinko made this check out per instructions that he received from Cook.
b. The backside of this check is signed T. L. DeWitt Design with the signature of
Charles H. Cook as the last endorsement.
c. This check was deposited into Cook's personal checking account at Community
Bank & Trust on or about September 21, 1996.
1. Cook did not make any payment to Tricia DeWitt during this time period.
68. Harold Rinko never met Tricia DeWitt or anyone else from T. L. DeWitt Designs and was
unaware of her performing design services until being advised by Cook.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 19 of 31
a. Rinko would not have used T. L. DeWitt Designs absent Cook's involvement.
69. Cook was responsible for inspecting and approving the system design, installation and
issuance of a sewer permit in his capacity as Franklin Township SEO.
a. On September 21, 1996, Cook issued Permit No. 010951 to Rinko after approving
the design which he and /or his daughter designed.
70. Rinko would not have sought a building estimate from Cook without Cook's solicitation while
performing duties as SEO.
71. Rinko paid Cook approximately $9,493.00 for construction work on his house.
a. Cook was replaced by another builder prior to completing Rinko's house.
b. Cook's work on the project included installing a sewer drain pipe from the house to
the septic tank.
72. Richard VanAuken contacted Cook to arrange for a sewer permit for property located at RR
3, Box 324C, Montrose, Silver Lake Township, sometime prior to June 26, 1997.
a. VanAuken contacted Cook in Cook's capacity as Silver Lake Township SEO to
obtain information on the process of obtaining the sewer permit.
b. Prior to submitting the permit application, VanAuken discussed the system design
with Cook.
c. Cook informed VanAuken that his daughter, Tricia DeWitt did design work.
d. Cook did not provide VanAuken with the names of any other certified system
designers.
e. VanAuken utilized Tricia DeWitt to do the design based on conversations with and
the recommendation of Cook.
f. VanAuken never met DeWitt and is unaware whether DeWitt actually designed the
system.
73. Richard VanAuken issued personal check number 689 in the amount of $150.00 to Tricia
DeWitt on July 7, 1997, for the septic system design.
a. This check was made payable to DeWitt at Cook's direction.
b. The check was deposited into Cook's personal account, No. 100233981.
c. No payments emanated from Cook's personal account to Tricia DeWitt for designing
the VanAuken system.
74. Cook in his official capacity as SEO was responsible for approving septic system design
drawings completed by DeWitt for the VanAuken property and ultimately issuing the sewer
permit.
a. Cook issued permit no. 0 -10972 to VanAuken on June 26, 1997.
75. During the time prior to June 26, 1997, when VanAuken met with Cook regarding the sewer
system design, VanAuken advised Cook that he intended on buying a modular home.
a. Cook informed VanAuken that he builds homes and solicited VanAuken to build his
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 20 of 31
home.
76. Cook subsequently contracted with VanAuken to build his house.
a. VanAuken paid Cook approximately $60,000 for construction services.
b. VanAuken would not have known to use Cook as a builder had Cook not offered
these services when serving in his capacity as SEO.
c. Cook's interactions with VanAuken came as a result of Cook's position as SEO.
77. Edward Montross, R.D. #3, Box 295C, Montrose, Franklin Township, was issued sewer
permit number N25956 by Cook on March 4, 1996, for repairs to his system.
a. No system design is required when repairs to systems are made.
b. Cook handled any design work needed for this repair.
c. Montross is not known to have paid Cook for any design drawings.
78. During the time period when Cook issued Montross the sewage permit, Montross and Cook
discussed Montross' building plans.
a. Montross' home was burned and he wanted to use the existing system when
rebuilding.
b. Cook was recommended to Montross by one of Montross' neighbors.
c. Montross wanted to use a local builder on his home.
d. Montross paid Cook approximately $75,000 for building services.
79. David R. Culp owns a cabin located in Silver Lake Township.
a. In December 1996 or January 1997, Culp filed a sewer permit application with Cook.
80. During the permit application process, prior to January 15, 1997, Culp agreed to use the
services of Cook to perform septic system design work and other building /construction/
renovation work.
a. Cook advised Culp that he did design work as well as building construction.
b. Culp was not aware of Cook performing these services prior to the meeting.
81. David R. Culp was issued sewer permit number 0 -10959 by Cook for a new septic system
for property in Silver Lake Township on January 15, 1997.
82. Culp issued personal check number 2138, dated October 31, 1997, in the amount of
$150.00 to Cook.
a. This check was for septic system design work.
b. Cook deposited this check into his personal account, no. 100233981.
83. Cook, as SEO, was responsible for approving the design drawings for the Culp Sewer
System which he prepared.
84. Culp paid Cook at least $2,225.00 for construction /renovation work Cook performed.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 21 of 31
a. Cook initiated private business dealings with Culp while serving in his capacity as
SEO for Silver Lake Township.
The following findings relate to Cook's failure to file Statements of Financial Interests.
85. As a sewage enforcement officer Cook was required to file a Statement of Financial Interest
form with each municipality where he served by May 1 for the prior calendar year.
86. Silver Lake Township was the only municipality that Cook filed any Statements of Financial
Interests with prior to February 16, 2001.
87. Statements of Financial Interests filed with Silver Lake Township included the following
filings for Cook as of February 15, 2001.
a. Calendar Year: 1999
No forms filed
b. Calendar Year: 1998
No forms filed
c. Calendar Year:
Filed:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
All Other Financial Interests:
d. Calendar Year:
1. No forms filed.
2. Cook submitted an incomplete SFI dated 04/23/97 with no financial information or
calendar year included.
e. Calendar Year:
Filed:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
All Other Financial Interests:
f. Calendar Year:
Filed:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
Financial Interest in any
Legal Entity:
All Other Financial Interests:
1997
04/16/98 on SEC Form 1/98
Sewage Enforcement Officer
None
Silver Lake Township
None
1996
1995
04/25/96 on SEC Form 1/96
Sewage Enforcement Officer
None
Self- Employed
None
1994
04/25/95 on SEC Form 1/95
Sewage Enforcement Officer
None
Military Retirement
Cook's Sawmill — 100%
None
88. On February 15, 2001, Cook was sent a civil penalty notice under the signature of the
Executive Director of the State Ethics Commission for his failure to file Statements of
Financial Interests with Silver Lake Township for calendar years 1998 and 1999.
a. Cook served as SEO for Silver Lake Township from October 1, 1990, until March 12,
1999.
b. Cook was directed to file the forms within twenty (20) days or face civil action.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 22 of 31
89. On March 9, 2001, Cook filed SFI's for Silver Lake Township with the State Ethics
Commission for calendar years 1998 and 1999.
90. Statements of Financial Interests filed by Cook for Silver Lake Township with the State
Ethics Commission on March 9, 2001, include the following information:
a. Calendar Year:
Dated:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
Office, Directorship or Emp.
in any business:
Financial Interest in any
Business:
All Other Financial Interests:
b. Calendar Year:
Dated:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
Office, Directorship, or Emp.
in any Business:
Financial Interest in any
Business:
Municipality
Montrose Borough
Bridgewater Township
Franklin Township
Middletown Township
New Milford Township
Friendsville Borough
Jessup Township
1999
02/16/01 on SEC Form 1/01
Sewage Enforcement Officer
Ford Motor Company, 9.5%
Rental Income, Franklin Township, Silver Lake
Township, Bridgewater Township
Owner, Cooks portable sawmill
Cooks Portable Sawmill, 100%
None
1998
02/16/01
Sewage Enforcement Officer
Ford Credit, 9.5%
Rental Income, Silver Lake Township, Bridgewater
Township, Franklin Township
Cooks Construction, owner
Cooks Construction, 100%
91. Cook failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with the following municipalities while
serving as sewage enforcement officer.
Years Service
07/05/94- 03/12/99
01/06/92-03/12/99
01/06/92-03/12/99
05/04/98- 03/12/99
07/09/97- 03/12/99
01/94 — 03/12/99
01/02/92-03/12/99
Calendar Years
1995 through 1999
1995 through 1999
1995 through 1999
1998, 1999
1997, 1998, 1999
1995 -1999
1995 -1999
92. Cook was sent civil penalty notices under the signature of the Executive Director of the
State Ethics Commission for his failure to file Statements of Financial Interests with
Montrose Borough, Bridgewater Township, Franklin Township, Middletown Township, New
Milford Township, Friendsville Borough and Jessup Township.
a. The notices were dated February 12, 2001; February 14, 2001; February 14, 2001;
and February 16, 2001.
b. The notices directed Cook to file the forms within twenty (20) days or face civil action.
93. On March 6, 2001, Cook filed SFI's for Montrose Borough with the State Ethics Commission
for calendar years 1995, 1996, 1997 and 1998.
94. On March 12, 2001, Cook filed Statements of Financial Interests for Bridgewater Township
with the State Ethics Commission for calendar years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999.
95. On March 15, 2001, Cook filed SFI's for Franklin Township with the State Ethics
Commission for calendar years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 23 of 31
96. On March 7, 2001, Cook filed SFI's for Middletown Township with the State Ethics
Commission for calendar years 1998 and 1999.
97. Cook failed to file Statements of Financial Interests as SEO in New Milford Township for
calendar years 1997, 1998 and 1999.
a. Cook served as SEO for New Milford Township from July 9, 1997, until March 12,
1999. Cook failed to file any SFI's with New Milford Township even after being
notified of his filing requirements with other municipalities he served as SEO.
98. Cook failed to file Statements of Financial Interests as SEO in Friendsville Borough for
calendar years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999.
a. Cook served as SEO for Friendsville Borough from at least 1994 until March 12,
1999.
99. Cook failed to file any SFI's with Friendsville Borough even after being notified of his filing
requirements with other municipalities he served as SEO.
100. Cook failed to file Statements of Financial Interests as SEO in Jessup Township for calendar
years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999.
a. Cook served as SEO for Jessup Township from January 2, 1992, until March 12,
1999.
101. Cook failed to file any SFI's with Jessup Township even after being notified of his filing
requirements with other municipalities he served as SEO.
102. Cook and members of his immediate family received a private pecuniary benefit as a result of
Cook's actions of soliciting sewer system design work from sewer permit applicants while
performing duties as a sewage enforcement officer.
a. All design drawings for which Cook or his daughter received payment were the result
of solicitations by Cook while performing his official duties as SEO.
b. DeWitt's system design work was the direct result of Cook serving as SEO.
c. Cook inspected and approved designs completed by him and /or his daughter Tricia
DeWitt.
103. A total of $8,600 was paid to Cook for the design of sewer septic systems which he approved
as sewage enforcement officer.
a. Cook paid Tricia DeWitt $1,500 of this amount.
104. Cook received a private pecuniary benefit of $146,718 for home construction /remodeling as
a result of solicitations made while performing his duties as a SEO.
a. Cook contracted with Harold Rinko ($9,493), Richard VanAuken ($60,000), Edward
Montross ($75,000) and David Culp ($2,225).
105. Cook has not filed Statements of Financial Interests as follows:
a. Jessup Township, calendar years 1995 through 1999.
b. Friendsville Borough, calendar years 1995 through 1999.
c. New Milford Township, calendar years 1997, 1998 and 1999.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 24 of 31
III. DISCUSSION:
Respondent Charles H. Cook (also referred to herein as "Respondent" or "Cook ") has at all
times relevant to these proceedings been a public official /public employee subject to the provisions
of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law ( "Ethics Law "), Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law 26, 65
P.S. §401 et seq., as codified by the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 93 of 1998,
Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. §1101 et seq., which Acts are collectively referred to herein as the "Ethics
Act.'
The issue before us is whether Cook, in his capacity as a sewage enforcement officer,
violated Sections 3(a)/1103(a) and 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act: (1) when he used the authority of
his office for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or members of his immediate family by
recommending to applicants that he and /or his daughter perform sewer system designs; (2) when he
approved septic system designs that had been completed by his daughter and him; (3) when he
used the authority of his public position as sewage enforcement officer to obtain business contracts
for his private home construction business; and (4) when he failed to file Statements of Financial
Interests with Jessu p Township for calendar years 1995 through 1999, Friendsville Borough for
calendar years 1995 through 1999, and New Milford Township for calendar years 1997 and 1998.
Initially, we must consider a procedural issue that has arisen regarding the receipt of an
Answer to the Investigative Complaint. The pleading stage in this case began with the issuance of
the Investigative Complaint /Findings Report on May 16, 2001. On its face, the Investigative
Complaint /Findings Report stated that an Answer had to be received at this Commission within thirty
(30) days of issuance and that the Respondent should take that document to an attorney at once.
In this case, an Answer was received on June 18, 2001, which was thirty -three (33) days after the
issuance of the Investigative Complaint.
A letter in the nature of a Motion Nunc Pro Tunc was received from Respondent on June 20,
2001. Substantively, the letter consists of a single paragraph which states:
I request you to consider my response in the referenced case number stated above.
My response was mailed priority mail, certified and I was assured by the post office
that it would arrive by June 15, 2001. I feel I should not be penalized because of
problems with the mail system.
(Letter of Cook dated June 20, 2001).
The Investigative Division filed an Answer and New Matter opposing the Respondent's
motion, arguing that Respondent's response to the Investigative Complaint /Findings Report was
mailed on June 14, 2001, the day before it was due; that it was not mailed by priority mail, but rather,
only by certified mail; and that in any event, the United States Postal Service does not guarantee
next day delivery for priority mail, which is typically delivered within two days, not one day.
It is clear under the Ethics Act and Regulations that a response to the Investigative
Complaint must be received within 30 days. 65 Pa.C.S. §1108(e); 51 Pa. Code §21.5(k). As noted
above, even the face sheet of the Investigative Complaint states that an Answer must be received
within 30 days.
We note that our Regulations allow for the filing of an application for an extension to file an
Answer. 51 Pa. Code §21.5(k). No such request was made in this case prior to the filing deadline.
The Answer in this case was received three (3) days late.
In order for a late answer to be deemed timely filed, we apply the same standard as is applied
by the courts to untimely appeals (see, Getz v. Pennsylvania Game Commission, 475 A.2d 1369
(Pa. Commw. Ct. 1984) applying that standard in administrative proceedings to an untimely request
for a hearing). The standard is that to accept the untimely filing as if it were timely, there must either
have been fraud or a breakdown in the administrative process, see, West Penn Power Co. v.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 25 of 31
Goddard, 460 Pa. 551, 333 A.2d 909 (1975); Bianco v. Robinson Twp., 556 A.2d 993 (Pa.
Commw. Ct. 1989), which includes the postal process (Getz v. Pennsylvania Game Commission,
supra), or there must have been unique and compelling factual circumstances establishing non -
negligent failure to file timely, Grimaud v. Dep't of Env. Resources, 638 A.2d 299 (Pa. Commw. Ct.
1994).
None of the conditions for allowing the filing of a late Answer is present in this case. The
argument proffered by Respondent is that the response was mailed by priority mail, certified and that
he was assured by the post office that it would arrive by June 15, 2001. The argument is without
merit. We are aware that the United States Postal Service advertises Priority Mail as a 2 -3 day
service and does not guarantee delivery time. Specifically, we take administrative notice of the
Domestic Mail Manual of the United States Postal Service, which provides that: (1) Priority Mail is
First -Class Mail with no guaranteed delivery time; and (2) "Certified mail is dispatched and handled
in transit as ordinary mail." See, Domestic Mail Manual at §§ D100 (Summary and 1.0); E120.1.1;
and S912.1.1 -1.2.
Because the United States Postal Service does not guarantee overnight delivery of items
mailed by certified priority mail, and because there is only Respondent's unsupported assertion that
a contrary representation was made to him, Respondent's Motion Nunc Pro Tunc is denied. We
must decide this case based upon the averments of the Investigative Complaint /Findings Report,
which averments are deemed to have been admitted by the Respondent.
Pursuant to Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act quoted above, a public official /public
employee is prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest:
§1103. Restricted activities
(a) Conflict of interest. - -No public official or public employee shall engage in
conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest.
65 Pa.C.S. §1103(a).
The term "conflict" or "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 93 of 1998 as follows:
§1102. Definitions
"Conflict" or "conflict of interest." Use by a public official or public
employee of the authority of his office or employment or any confidential information
received through his holding public office or employment for the private pecuniary
benefit of himself, a member of his immediate family or a business with which he or a
member of his immediate family is associated. The term does not include an action
having a de minimis economic impact or which affects to the same degree a class
consisting of the general public or a subclass consisting of an industry, occupation or
other group which includes the public official or public employee, a member of his
immediate family or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is
associated.
65 Pa.C.S. §1102.
Section 3(a)/1103 (a) of the Ethics Act prohibits a public official /public employee from using
the authority of public office/employment or confidential information received by holding such a
public position for the private pecuniary benefit of the public official /public employee himself, any
member of his immediate family, or a business with which he or a member of his immediate family is
associated.
Section 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act 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:
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 26 of 31
§ 1104. Statement of financial interests required to be filed
(a) Public official or public employee. -- 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 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a).
Having noted the issues and applicable law, we shall now summarize the relevant facts.
At all times relevant to this case, Respondent Cook served as a certified sewage
enforcement officer for numerous townships and boroughs in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
Respondent served as sewage enforcement officer for Franklin Township from January 6, 1992,
until March 12, 1999; for Jessup Township from January 2, 1992, until March 12, 1999; for
Middletown Township from May 4, 1998, until March 12, 1999; for Bridgewater Township from
January 6, 1992, until March 12, 1999; for New Milford Township from July 9, 1997, until March 12,
1999; for Silver Lake Township from October 1, 1990, until March 12, 1999; for Montrose Borough
from July 5, 1994, until March 12, 1999; and for Friendsville Borough from at least 1994 until March
12, 1999.
Sewage enforcement officers administer and enforce the Pennsylvania Sewage Facilities Act
'Sewage Enforcement Act "), Act of January 24, 1966, P.L. (1965) 1535, as amended, 35 P.S.
750.1 et seq.; the Clean Streams Law, Act of June 22, 1937, P.L. 1987, as amended, 35 P.S.
691.1 et seq.; Section 1917 -A of the Administrative Code of 1929, Act of April 9, 1929, P.L. 177,
as amended, 71 P.S. §510 -17; and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, under the
overall supervision of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
Respondent's powers and duties as a sewage enforcement officer included the power and duty to
issue, deny, and revoke permits within the jurisdictions of the local agencies in which he was
employed as sewage enforcement officer.
Procedurally, property owners seeking to install on -lot sewage systems are required to submit
applications to the municipality where the property is located, usually to the municipality's sewage
enforcement officer. Applicants submit a completed permit application with percolation test results
and system design drawings. An approved septic system design drawing is required for a permit to
be issued for a new septic system. The sewage enforcement officer is responsible for identifying
the type of system needed and approving the septic system design drawings.
Once an application for a sewage permit is received, the sewage enforcement officer is
responsible for: (1) Confirming all tests used to determine suitability of a site for an on -lot sewage
system (this includes going to the site to meet with the applicant); (2) confirming that the application
is complete and that the proposed system design is in compliance with legal requirements (this also
includes going to the site to meet with the applicant prior to issuance of the permit); (3) giving timely
written notice to the applicant or permittee of approval, denial or revocation of a permit; and (4)
submitting the application and permit to DEP and the municipality.
In addition to being subject to the requirements of the Ethics Act, sewage enforcement
officers are subject to regulations at 25 Pa. Code §72.41 which are quoted in part at Finding 15.
Although such other regulations are not within the jurisdiction of this Commission to interpret or
enforce, they are consistent with the Ethics Act insofar as they prohibit certain types of conduct
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 27 of 31
which would constitute a conflict of interest under the Ethics Act. Cook was made aware of such
regulations as part of a DEP "administrative conference" held June 26, 1992.
Administrative conferences are DEP's procedure for handling issues which could result in
sanctions being imposed by DEP against a sewage enforcement officer for conflict of interest
issues. During the June 26, 1992, administrative conference, it was learned that Cook, in his
capacity as a sewage enforcement officer, had approved an on -lot sewer system design prepared by
his daughter, Tricia L. DeWitt, as part of a certain permit application. Cook was informed by DEP of
the provisions of 25 Pa. Code §72.41(e), (f), (g), and (h) as related to the situation of approving
permits based on systems designed by his daughter. Cook was directed not to engage in duties of a
sewage enforcement officer where a conflict of interest did or will occur, including approving system
designs submitted by a family member.
After the June 26, 1992, administrative conference, DEP did not review Respondent's
involvement in any other sewer permits until a second DEP administrative conference was
conducted with Respondent on February 24, 1999. During the February 24, 1999, administrative
conference, Respondent admitted the following infractions: (1) not submitting copies of permits to
DEP as required, to avoid the required review of such permits by DEP personnel; (2) allowing his
daughter to do design work of systems for which he issued permits despite having been made aware
of a conflict of interest at the 1992 administrative conference; and (3) performing construction work
on a septic system. As a result of the administrative conference, DEP revoked Respondent's
sewage enforcement officer license as of March 12, 1999.
The conduct which is before us for review in this case occurred prior to the revocation of
Respondent's license, during his service as a sewage enforcement officer.
We shall first recite the material facts pertaining to the first and second portions of the
allegation involving: (1) solicitations for septic system design work while acting in the capacity of
sewage enforcement officer; and (2) the review of such work performed in a private capacity. The
pertinent material facts are that while performing his official duties as a sewage enforcement officer,
Respondent recommended to numerous applicants that he and /or his daughter perform sewer
system designs. After obtaining such sewer system design work for himself and /or his daughter,
Respondent, in his capacity as a sewage enforcement officer, then approved the septic system
designs which he and /or his daughter had completed. Between May 1995 and January 1999,
Respondent and /or his daughter were responsible for completing septic system design drawings for
at least fifty -seven (57) of 117 applicants for which Respondent issued a sewer permit in his official
capacity as a sewage enforcement officer. All design drawings for which Respondent or his
daughter received payment were the result of solicitations by Respondent while performing his
official duties as sewage enforcement officer.
A total of $8,550 was paid to Respondent and his daughter for the design of sewer septic
systems which Respondent approved as sewage enforcement officer (Finding 58). We would note
that as to the total amount of such compensation, there is a $50 difference between the amounts
reflected in Findings 58 and 103 of the Investigative Complaint /Findings Report, which difference
appears to be attributable to the Rinko payment, check #6874, as set forth in Finding 53. We will
resolve the $50 disparity to the Respondent's advantage.
DEP was not aware of this ongoing course of conduct by the Respondent. Respondent
failed to file permit design drawings with DEP as required, thus concealing the fact that he and /or his
daughter were performing the system design work as part of permits Respondent issued.
Respondent regularly omitted the name of the system designer and design plans on permits he filed
with municipalities and DEP. Respondent admittedly did so to avoid having his permits reviewed by
DEP personnel. Indeed, of the identified 117 permits issued for new systems by Respondent, only
6 had the required design drawings attached or the designer's name identified on the permit. Of
these 6, 2 designs had been prepared by the state for state facilities. The other 4 were noted as
having been completed by "T.L. DeWitt Designs." No system design drawings were submitted to
DEP for any of the remaining 111 permits issued by Respondent during that time.
The third portion of the allegation involves Respondent's use of the authority of his public
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 28 of 31
position as a sewage enforcement officer to obtain business contracts for his private home
construction business. Per the admitted Findings, Respondent offered building services to four
identified individuals (Harold Rinko, Richard VanAuken, Edward Montross, and David Culp) to
whom he issued permits relating to on -lot septic systems. These solicitations by Responent
occurred during the process for issuing permits or inspecting sites in his capacity as sewage
enforcement officer, as set forth in Findings 65 -84. For three of the four properties, Respondent not
only obtained construction work for himself but also secured septic system design work for himself
and /or his daughter.
Per the admitted Findings, Respondent received $146,718 for home construction/
remodeling as a result of solicitations made while performing his duties as a sewage enforcement
officer Harold Rinko ($9,493); Richard VanAuken ($60,000); Edward Montross ($75,000); and
David Culp ($2,225)).
The final portion of the allegation pertains to Respondent's failure to file Statements of
Financial Interests with Jessup Township for calendar years 1995 through 1999, Friendsville
Borough for calendar years 1995 through 1999 and New Milford Township for calendar years 1997
and 1998. Per admitted Findings 91 -101 and 105 of the Investigative Complaint /Findings Report,
Respondent did not file Statements of Financial Interests with the aforesaid municipalities for the
aforesaid calendar years, even after being notified of his filing requirements with other municipalities
he served as sewage enforcement officer.
Having highlighted the facts and issues, we must now determine whether the actions of
Respondent Cook violated Section(s) 3(a)/1103(a) or 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act. Since the
investigation in this matter was initiated May 25, 2000, we may only review incidents which occurred
from May 25, 1995 forward. 65 Pa.C.S. §1108(m).
In applying the first and second portions of the allegation to the facts before us, it is clear that
during the time period under review, Respondent engaged in an ongoing course of conduct of
soliciting private work while performing his duties as sewage enforcement officer, and then reviewing
that very work relative to the issuance of sewage permits, again in the capacity of sewage
enforcement officer. During the period under review, Respondent and /or his daughter were
responsible for completing numerous septic system design drawings for applicants for which
Respondent issued a sewer permit in his official capacity as a sewage enforcement officer. All such
design drawings for which Respondent or his daughter received payment were the result of
solicitations by Respondent while performing his official duties as sewage enforcement officer.
Accordingly, we find that there is clear and convincing evidence that Respondent repeatedly
violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his public position as
sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or his daughter, Tricia L
DeWitt, a member of his immediate family, by recommending to numerous sewage permit applicants
from May 25, 1995 through January 1999 that Respondent and /or his daughter perform sewer
system designs. See, e.q., Metrick, Order 1037, wherein we held that it is a conflict of interest under
Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act for a public official /public employee to pursue a private
business opportunity in the course of public action.
Likewise, there is clear and convincing evidence that Respondent repeatedly violated Section
3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act from May 25, 1995 through February 1999 when he used the
authority of his public position as sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of
himself and /or his daughter by approving and issuing permits for the very septic system designs that
he and /or his daughter had prepared in a private capacity. See, Miller, Opinion 89 -024;
Kannebecker, Opinion 92 -010; Snyder v. State Ethics Commission, 686 A.2d 843 Pa. Cmwlth.
1996), alloc. den., No. 0029 M.D. Allocatur Docket 1997 (Pa. December 22, 1997) (Public official
violated the Ethics Act by participating in his public capacity in matters in which he had a private
pecuniary interest).
A total of $8,550 was paid to Respondent and his daughter for the design of sewer septic
systems which Respondent approved as sewage enforcement officer (Finding 58).
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 29 of 31
Respondent violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his
position as sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or members
of his immediate family by soliciting business contracts for his private home construction business.
Metrick, Order 1037, supra. Respondent received $146,718 for home construction /remodeling as a
result of solicitations made while performing his duties as a sewage enforcement officer.
Finally, in applying the allegation to the admitted Findings regarding delinquent Statements of
Financial Interests, we hold that Respondent violated Section 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act when
he failed to file Statements of Financial Interests with Jessup Township for calendar years 1995
through 1999, Friendsville Borough for calendar years 1995 through 1999 and New Milford
Township for calendar years 1997 and 1998. As to New Milford Township, we would note that per
Finding 105 c, Respondent also failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year
1999, and we shall direct the filing of that delinquent Statement of Financial Interests as well as the
others. Respondent is directed to make full and accurate disclosure on all such Statements of
Financial Interests. Given the admitted facts in this case, it would appear that other Statements of
Financial Interests previously filed by Respondent have not fully disclosed all sources of income and
financial interests (see, Findings 87 and 90).
As for financial penalties, the Investigative Division in its position statement filed June 22,
2001, seeks an Order imposing restitution in the amount of the private pecuniary benefit received by
Respondent and /or his daughter for septic system design work resulting from Respondent's
solicitations for such work while acting in the capacity of a sewage enforcement officer. (June 22,
2001, Letter of Shugars at 1). We have determined that amount to be $8,550. The Investigative
Division recognizes that restitution cannot properly be calculated as to Respondent's solicitation of
business contracts for his private home construction business. Id. Although the total amount
received by Respondent for that work is known, there is an undetermined portion of that amount
attributable to materials and the like.
Section 7(13)/1107(13) of the Ethics Act empowers this Commission to impose restitution in
instances where a public official /public employee has obtained a financial gain in violation of the
Ethics Act.
Restitution is warranted in this case. Accordingly, Cook is directed within 30 days of the date
of mailing of this Order to make payment of restitution to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
through this Commission in the amount of $8,550. Non - compliance will result in the institution of an
order enforcement action.
While intent is not a requisite element for a violation of the Ethics Act, Yocabet v. State
Ethics Commission, 531 A.2d 536 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987), Respondent clearly knew that what he was
doing was illegal, at the very least under the aforementioned regulations applicable to sewage
enforcement officers. Given the intentional nature of Respondent's conduct and his deliberate
efforts to conceal his activities by withholding information that would have revealed his illegal
conduct to DEP, we find the violations in this case to be egregious.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Respondent Charles H. Cook ( "Cook "), as a sewage enforcement officer in numerous
townships and boroughs in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, was at all times relevant to
this case a public official /public employee subject to the provisions of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law 26, 65 P.S. §401 et seq., as codified by
the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 93 of 1998, Chapter 11, 65 Pa.C.S. §1101
et seq., which Acts are collectively referred to herein as the "Ethics Act."
2. Cook repeatedly violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority
of his public position as sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of
himself and /or his daughter, Tricia L DeWitt, a member of his immediate family, by
recommending to numerous sewage permit applicants from May 25, 1995 through January
1999 that Cook and /or his daughter perform sewer system designs.
Cook 00- 019 -C2
Page 30 of 31
3. Cook repeatedly violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act from May 25, 1995 through
February 1999 when he used the authority of his public position as sewage enforcement
officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or his daughter by approving and
issuing permits for septic system designs that he and /or his daughter had prepared in a
private capacity.
4. Cook violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his
position as sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or
members of his immediate family by soliciting business contracts for his private home
construction business with sewer permit applicants Harold Rinko, Richard VanAuken,
Edward Montross, and David Culp.
5. Cook violated Section 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act when he failed to file Statements of
Financial Interests with Jessup Township for calendar years 1995 through 1999, Friendsville
Borough for calendar years 1995 through 1999 and New Milford Township for calendar
years 1997 and 1998. Cook also failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar
year 1999 with New Milford Township.
In Re: Charles H. Cook
File Docket: 00- 019 -C2
Date Decided: 6/27/01
Date Mailed: 7/3/01
ORDER NO. 1203
1. Respondent Charles H. Cook ( "Cook "), as a sewage enforcement officer in numerous
townships and boroughs in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, repeatedly violated Section
3(a)/1103(a) of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law, Act 9 of 1989, Pamphlet Law
26, 65 P.S. §401 et seq. as codified by the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act, Act 93
of 1998, 1998, 11, 65 seq., §1101 et seq., which Acts are collectively referred to herein
as the "Ethics Act," when he used the authority of his public position as sewage enforcement
officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or his daughter, Tricia L DeWitt, a
member of his immediate family, by recommending to numerous sewage permit applicants
from May 25, 1995 through January 1999 that Cook and /or his daughter perform sewer
system designs.
2. Cook repeatedly violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act from May 25, 1995 through
February 1999 when he used the authority of his public position as sewage enforcement
officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or his daughter by approving and
issuing permits for septic system designs that he and /or his daughter had prepared in a
private capacity.
3. Cook violated Section 3(a)/1103(a) of the Ethics Act when he used the authority of his
position as sewage enforcement officer for the private pecuniary benefit of himself and /or
members of his immediate family by soliciting business contracts for his private home
construction business with sewer permit applicants Harold Rinko, Richard VanAuken,
Edward Montross, and David Culp.
4. Cook violated Section 4(a)/1104(a) of the Ethics Act when he failed to file Statements of
Financial Interests with Jessup Township for calendar years 1995 through 1999, Friendsville
Borough for calendar years 1995 through 1999 and New Milford Township for calendar
years 1997 and 1998.
5. Cook also failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 1999 with New
Milford Township.
6. Cook is ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $8,550 to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania for deposit in the State Treasury by forwarding a check in the amount of
$8,550 to this Commission payable to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania within 30 days of
the mailing date of this Order.
7. Cook is ordered to file within 30 days of the mailing date of this Order accurate and complete
Statements of Financial Interests with Jessup Township for calendar years 1995 through
1999, Friendsville Borough for calendar years 1995 through 1999 and New Milford
Township for calendar years 1997 through 1999, and to forward copies of same to this
Commission at the following address to evidence compliance:
Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission
309 Finance Building
P.O. Box 11470
Harrisburg, PA 17108 -1470
8. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the institution of an order enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
DANEEN E. REESE, CHAIR