HomeMy WebLinkAbout1348 HooverIn Re: Gail Hoover
File Docket:
X -ref:
Date Decided:
Date Mailed:
Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair
John J. Bolger, Vice Chair
Daneen E. Reese
Donald M. McCurdy
Michael Healey
Raquel K. Bergen
03 -031
Order No. 1348
11/29/04
12/8/04
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
Act, Act 9 of 1989, P.L. 26, 65 P.S. § 401 et seq., as codified by Act 93 of 1998, Chapter
11, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 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 filed and a hearing was waived. The record is complete. A
Consent Agreement and Stipulation of Findings were submitted by the parties to the
Commission for consideration. The Stipulation of Findings is quoted as the Findings in
this Order. The Consent Agreement was subsequently approved.
Effective December 15, 1998, Act 9 of 1989 was repealed and replaced by Chapter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.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 2
I. ALLEGATION:
That you, Gail Hoover, a (public official /public employee) in your capacity as a
Member of the Allentown City Council violated Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), and 1105(b)(5),
(6), of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Law (Act 93 of 1998), when you used the
authority of your public office for a private pecuniary gain, including but not limited to
submitting and receiving reimbursement for travel related expenses, including but not
limited to airfare, meals, lodging, limousine services for travel not related to your position
as a member of council; and which was not approved by council; when you failed to file a
Statement of Financial Interests for the 2001 calendar year, by May 1, 2002; when you
failed to disclose on Statements of Financial Interests filed for calendar year 2002 all
sources of income; and when you failed to report a gift in excess of $250 from SRI in the
form of conference registration and meals; and when you failed to list sources of income
on her Statement of Financial Interests for the 2002 calendar year.
II. FINDINGS:
1. Gail Hoover has served as a member of Allentown City Council since January 2002.
a. Hoover holds no other positions on council.
2. Hoover is a licensed real estate agent in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
a. Hoover has been licensed as a real estate agent since October 21 1988.
b. Hoover is currently licensed under Creighton Real Estate Incorporated.
c. Creighton Real Estate trades as ReMax Marketplace, Lehigh Valley, PA.
3. Allentown City Council members may, at their discretion, elect to participate in
training seminars, conferences and meetings.
a. Attendance at such events does not require a vote of council.
b. Training seminars must be related to the operation of city government.
1. Council members must justify that expenses for training are related to
training for city purposes.
c. Council members attending such training generally advise the President of
City Council.
4. The City of Allentown annually budgets funding to absorb the cost of training
seminars for members of council and city employees.
a. The budget line item that delineates allocated monies for training seminars
falls under the heading of "Professional Development and Training."
b. The budgeted amounts include funding for travel, lodging and subsistence
costs for city council members electing to participate in training seminars.
c. Budgeted training amount for 2002 was $13,200.
5. Councilmembers can opt to receive a credit card issued in the name of City of
Allentown for use on official city business.
a. Gail Hoover received a MasterCard credit card with a $2,000 credit limit.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 3
6. Members of city council typically do not attend training seminars or conferences
when overnight or extended travel is required.
7. Since January 2002 Gail Hoover is the only member of council who has requested
reimbursement for expenses for extended travel.
a. Hoover has used the city issued MasterCard to pay for some of these
expenses.
8. In or about August 2002, Hoover received a brochure that a seminar related to regl
estate investments was to be held in San Francisco, California on September 17
and 18 2002.
a. The brochure announcing the conference was sent to the attention of city
council president, David Howells.
b. Howells was provided the brochure upon attending a city council meeting.
c. Howells did not read the brochure but gave it to Hoover who was sitting near
him since it appeared to be related to real estate, the area of Howell's
employment.
9. Strategic Research Institute, Inc. (SRI) coordinated the training seminar which was
titled "Institutional Real Estate Investing 2002."
a. The seminar was sponsored by Deloitte Touche.
b. The event was held at the Marriott San Francisco Fisherman's Wharf on
September 17 -18, 2002.
c. The purpose of the event was to provide the following in relation to real
estate investments for pension fund accounts:
"Determine the most effective vehicles in real estate. Discover new
investment opportunities and what to do with current real estate assets.
Assess the current value of real estate assets."
d. The standard registration fee for the seminar was $1,395.00.
1. This fee included breakfasts, lunches, refreshments, receptions and
conference documentation workbook.
10. Strategic Research Institute marketed the event as a seminar to determine why real
estate investing continues to flourish through an instable economy.
a. SRI's advertisement brochure suggested the following professional groups
would profit from knowledge gained at the conference:
1. Real Estate Investment Officers from Government Pension Funds;
Corporate Pension Funds; Endowments; and Foundations
2. Investment Managers from Opportunity Funds; Vulture Funds; Value -
Added Funds; and Investment Banks
3. Accountants; Attorneys; Business Brokers: Property Experts
11. Hoover decided to attend the conference even though she had no relation to or
position on any Allentown City Council board or commission dealing with
investments or pension funds.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 4
12. Hoover never advised any council members of her intent to attend the conference
prior to attending the seminar.
13. Eileen Werner, Allentown City Council Secretary, is responsible for making travel
arrangements for council members electing to participate in training seminars and
conferences.
14. Hoover advised Werner of her intent to attend the conference, and directed Werner
to arrange travel plans on her behalf.
a. Hoover requested that Werner book a flight to San Francisco a few days
prior to the start of the seminar in order for Hoover to "settle in."
b. Hoover informed Werner that Council President Howells had approved the
trip to San Francisco.
1. Howells informed Hoover it was at her discretion to attend the
conference.
15. Werner obtained all possible flight options relative to the trip and presented the
information to Hoover for her review and decision.
a. Werner also contacted SRI to reserve a space for Hoover at the conference.
16. SRI advised Hoover by letter dated August 26, 2002, of her reservation to attend
the September 17, 2002, conference.
a. Hoover's confirmation number was 98888.
b. Attached was invoice no. 109415 which indicated that there was no charges
or balances due.
1. Hoover was not required by SRI to pay the $1,395.00 registration fee.
17. Werner was instructed by Hoover to book a flight with Northwest Airlines departing
ABE International Airport on September 14 2002 and returning to ABE
International Airport on Thursday September 19 2002.
a. Werner made the flight arrangements through AAA Bethlehem.
18. Flight itinerary addressed to the City by the AAA Bethlehem confirmed the following
relating to the trip:
September 14, 2002
LV Allentown 9:10 a.m.
AR Detroit 10:47 a.m.
LV Detroit 12:25 a.m.
AR San Francisco 1:35 p.m. (PST)
September 19, 2002
LV San Francisco 10:35 a.m.
AR Cleveland 6:12 p.m. (EST)
LV Cleveland 7:05 p.m.
AR Allentown 8:21 p.m.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 5
19. Total cost of the round trip flight was $468.00.
a. Hoover charged the flight cost to a personal credit card and sought
reimbursement from the City.
20. By memo dated September 9, 2002, to Beth Mohylsky of the City's Treasury and
Finance Departments, Werner requested a check in the amount of $468.00 for
Hoover.
a. City check no. 3338 was issued to Hoover on September 9, 2002, in the
amount of $468.00 as reimbursement for the airline ticket.
21. Hoover arrived in San Francisco on September 14, 2002, three days prior to the
actual start of the seminar.
a. There were no activities scheduled for the conference until September 17
2002 at 8:45 am, PST
22. Hoover incurred expenses for September 14 2002, the period prior to the start of
the conference, included lodging, meals, and a limousine service as follows:
Date Lodginq Meals Other
September 14, 2003 $204.14 $10.48 $50.00 (limousine
service to hotel
September 15, 2003 $226.95* $39.14 from airport)
September 16, 2003 $210.98* $45.00
TOTALS $642.07 $94.62 $50.00
GRAND TOTAL $786.69
*Total includes room
service for meals
separate from daily
subsistence
23. Hoover incurred total expenditures, excluding airfare, for the trip to San Francisco
as follows:
Date Lodging Meals Other Extension Total
September 14 $204.14 $10.48 $50.00 (limo) $264.62
September 15 $226.95 $39.14 $266.09
September 16 $210.98 $45.00 $255.98
September 17 $210.98 $0.00 $210.98
September 18 $210.98 $29.43 $50.00 (limo) $290.41
September 19 $0.00 $8.48 $8.41 [sic]
Grand Total $1,296.56
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 6
24. Members of city council have generally followed the same regulations as city
employees regarding the reimbursement or payment of expenses related to official
city travel and business.
a. There have been no specific regulations or policies enacted by council
governing travel and related expenses of council members.
25. Expenses incurred in relation to training and conferences for city employees is
covered by Administrative Regulations 3 -1 -02 issued on April 28, 2000.
a. The regulation establishes policies governing the payment and
reimbursement of training and /or conference expenditures.
b. The regulation also delineates a uniform policy for cash advances.
c. The regulation provides that the city will pay for legitimate and reasonable
costs for training /conferences and official business meetings.
26. Acceptable expenses as outlined in Section 4.0 of the Regulation includes the
following:
a. Transportation and related expenses:
1. Airfare: Economy rates shall be used for bus, train and air travel.
The city will be responsible for up to $700 airfare roundtrip.
2. Personal Vehicles: Flat rate per mile reimbursement.
3. Commuter Service: Costs for bus, limousine, taxi and subway are
reimbursable. Car rentals are not eligible for
reimbursement.
4. Parking Garage and Toll Charges: Costs are reimbursable.
b. Registration Fees: Costs for fees and course materials are reimbursable.
c. Lodging: Lodging in relation to conferences and meetings are
reimbursable.
d. Meals: An allowance of actual costs not exceeding $45.00 per day for
multi -day seminars. No meal reimbursements for one -day events.
27. Employees and /or officials seeking reimbursement for expenses incurred while on
city official business submit receipts to the Office of Chief Clerk.
a. Michael Hanlon serves as the Allentown Chief Clerk.
b. Hanlon's office prepares travel expense vouchers for members of council
based on receipts provided.
c. Hanlon applies the Administrative Regulations to council member expenses.
d. Expense reports are then submitted to the City Finance Office for payment.
28. Barbara Bigelow serves as the Finance Director for the City of Allentown.
a. Bigelow applies Administrative Regulations 3 -1 -02 when determining eligible
expense reimbursements for both employees and members of city council.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 7
b. Payments are issued based on expense vouchers submitted by the Chief
Clerk's Office.
29. Hoover provided receipts for the trip to San Francisco to Hanlon's office on or about
October 17, 2002.
a. Hanlon prepared a travel expense report for total expenses of $1,296.56.
b. The report was marked approved by David Howells, Sr. (Council President)
on October 18, 2002.
1. Hanlon made that notation on the report believing that Hoover had
cleared the expenses with Howells.
2. Howells did not review or approve Hoover's expenses.
30. Hoover submitted a Guest Folio from the Marriott Fisherman's Wharf which
included room, room tax, meal and limousine expenses totaling $1,170.23.
a. The charges had been billed to Hoover's personal MasterCard.
b. Receipts attached to the folio included the following amounts for parking,
additional meals not billed to the room, limo services.
09/14/02
09/15/02
09/15/02
09/16/02
09/18/02
09/19/02
09/19/02
$ 6.03
$ 4.43
$ 18.74
$ 31.09
$ 8.99
$ 50.00
$ 5.00
31. The travel expense report prepared by Hanlon based on the receipts submitted by
Hoover was forwarded to Barbara Bigelow, Finance Director.
32. Bigelow reviewed expenses associated with Hoover's trip to San Francisco for the
Real Estate Investment conference.
a. Bigelow approved the travel expense report for payment on or about October
21, 2002.
33. On October 21, 2002, a check was issued by the Finance Department to Hoover in
the amount of $1,296.56.
34. The City of Allentown Pension Board controls investments made to the city's
pension accounts on behalf of city employees.
a. The Pension Board which is chaired by Mr. Frank Concannon, City
Controller also includes Council Members Hershman and Burke.
b. The Pension Board members were not aware of this seminar.
c. Members of the Pension Board did not believe this seminar was beneficial to
investments of the City Pension Board.
35. Hoover is not a member of the Allentown City Pension Board.
a. City Council does not make decisions regarding investment options.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 8
36. Frank Concannon, City Controller, and Chairman of the Pension Board confirmed to
Ethics Commission Investigators that Hoover never spoke publicly or presented any
information to the Pension Board relative to Real Estate Investment Trusts.
37. Hoover did not provide council or the pension board with any formal report
concerning her attendance at the real estate pension seminar.
38. Hoover's attendance at the real estate investment seminar did not benefit the City
of Allentown.
39. Hoover's attendance at the real estate seminar benefited her as a licensed real
estate agent.
40. Hoover's trips to San Francisco, CA was [sic] not related to her position as a
member of council for the City of Allentown.
a. Councilmembers confirmed that council was not considering any real estate
investments prior to or after Hoover's trip.
b. No council action or activity was pending or occurred after Hoover's trip to
Puerto Rico relating to the rights of gay and lesbian community.
41. The following chart total expenses incurred by Hoover for travel not related to her
position as councilwoman.
San Francisco $1,296.56
Total $1,296.56
42. Gail Hoover realized a private pecuniary benefit of $1,296.56 for expenses paid for
by the City of Allentown while attending seminars of a personal nature in San
Francisco, CA.
43. Gail Hoover has filed Statements of Financial Interests with the City for calendar
year 2002 as an incumbent public official and as a candidate for calendar year
2000, which include the following disclosures:
a. Calendar Year:
Filed:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
All Other Financial Interests:
b. Calendar Year:
Filed:
Position:
Creditors:
Direct /Indirect Income:
All Other Financial Interests:
2000 on SEC Form 1/99
03/04/01
Council
City Bank Visa
Re -Max Marketplace Rental Properties
None
Not listed
04/01/03
Candidate Council
City Bank Visa
None
None
c. Hoover did not file a Statement of Financial Interests for the 2001 calendar
year by May 1, 2002.
d. Hoover did not disclose any sources of income on the form dated April 1,
2003.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 9
44. Hoover asserts that she believed then, and now, that council president, David
Howells, had given her authorization to attend the trip to San Francisco.
III. DISCUSSION:
At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Gail Hoover, hereinafter
Hoover, has been a public official 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 referred to herein as the "Ethics Act."
The allegations are that Hoover, as an Allentown City Council Member, violated
Sections 1103(a), 1104(a), and 1105(b)(5), (6), of the Ethics Act, when she submitted and
received reimbursement for travel expenses not related to her position as a member of
council; when she failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests (SFI) for the 2001
calendar year, by May 1, 2002; and when she failed to disclose on her SFI filed for
calendar year 2002 all sources of income of $1,300 or more and a gift in excess of $250
from Strategic Research Institute, Inc. (SRI).
Pursuant to Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, a public official /public employee is
prohibited from engaging in conduct that constitutes a conflict of interest.
The term "conflict of interest" is defined under Act 9 of 1989/Act 93 of 1998 as
follows:
Section 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. "Conflict" or "conflict of interest" 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 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 1104(a) of the Ethics Act provides:
§ 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
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 10
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).
Section 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.
Section 1105(b)(5), (6) of the Ethics Act provides:
§ 1105. Statement of financial interests
(b) Required information. - -The statement shall
include the following information for the prior calendar year
with regard to the person required to file the statement:
(5) The name and address of any direct or
indirect source of income totaling in the aggregate
$1,300 or more. However, this provision shall not be
construed to require the divulgence of confidential
information protected by statute or existing professional
codes of ethics or common law privileges.
(6) The name and address of the source and
the amount of any gift or gifts valued in the aggregate at
$250 or more and the circumstances of each gift. This
paragraph shall not apply to a gift or gifts received from
a spouse, parent, parent by marriage, sibling, child,
grandchild, other family member or friend when the
circumstances make it clear that the motivation for the
action was a personal or family relationship. However,
for the purposes of this paragraph, the term "friend"
shall not include a registered lobbyist or an employee of
a registered lobbyist.
65 Pa.C.S. §1005(b)(5), (6).
Section 1105(b)(5) of the Ethics Act requires that every public official /public
employee and candidate list the name and address of any direct or indirect source of
income totaling in the aggregate of $1,300 or more.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 11
Section 1105(b)(6) of the Ethics Act requires that every public official /public
employee and candidate list the name and address of the source and amount of any gift or
gifts valued in the aggregate of $250 or more.
As noted above, the parties have submitted a Consent Agreement and Stipulation of
Findings. The parties' Stipulated Findings are reproduced above as the Findings of this
Commission. We shall now summarize the relevant facts as contained therein.
Hoover has served as an Allentown City Council member since January of 2002. In
a private capacity, Hoover is a real estate agent licensed in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
The City of Allentown has a policy which allows council members to participate in
training seminars, conferences and meetings at their discretion. Any training seminar must
relate to the operation of city government. The council member's attendance does not
require a vote of council but the council member should advise the city council president of
any training. The city annually budgets funding to cover the costs of training seminars for
council members and city employees. Council members generally do not attend training
seminars or conferences which require overnight or extended travel. Hoover has been the
only member of council who has requested reimbursement of expenses for extended travel
since January of 2002.
In August of 2002, Hoover received a brochure for a real estate investment seminar
that was to be held in San Francisco, California on September 17 -18, 2002. SRI
sponsored the seminar on the subject of "Institutional Real Estate Investing 2002." The
specific topic for the seminar concerned real estate investments for pension fund accounts.
SRI noted that the professional who would benefit from the conference would be real
estate investment officers for government and other pension funds, investment managers,
and professionals such as accountants, attorneys, business brokers and property experts.
The registration fee for the two day seminar was $1,395 which included meals, receptions,
and the conference workbook.
Hoover decided to attend the conference even though she had no position with city
council or any board or commission that dealt with the investment of pension funds.
Hoover did not advise any council members of her plans to attend the conference but
merely directed Eileen Werner, the council secretary, to arrange for her (Hoover's) travel
plans. Hoover directed Werner to book a flight to San Francisco a few days prior to the
start of the seminar. Hoover informed Werner that the council president approved the trip
although he merely informed Hoover that her attendance at the conference was within her
discretion. When Hoover received a confirmation of her reservation to attend the seminar
from SRI, the attached invoice indicated that Hoover was not required by SRI to pay the
$1,395.00 registration fee. Hoover traveled to San Francisco via an air flight on
September 14, 2002, and returned to Allentown via flight on September 19, 2002. The
total roundtrip fare was $468.00. Hoover charged the flight to her personal credit card and
requested and received reimbursement from the city in the amount of $468.00 for the
airline ticket.
When Hoover arrived in San Francisco on September 14, 2002, it was three days
prior to the actual start of the seminar. The seminar had no activities scheduled until
September 17 at 8:45 a.m. Excluding the cost of the roundtrip airfare, Hoover incurred
expenses of $786.69 prior to the actual start of the seminar. See, Fact Finding 22.
Hoover incurred total expenditures, excluding airfare, for the entire trip to San Francisco in
the amount of $1,296.56. See, Fact Finding 23.
The City of Allentown has administrative regulations regarding council members and
employees seeking reimbursement for expenses related to official city travel and business,
covering transportation, registration fees, lodging, and meals within certain specified
allowances for multi -day seminars. Any such reimbursements must be submitted to the
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 12
city's Office of Chief Clerk with receipts attached. In October of 2002, Hoover submitted
receipts for her trip to San Francisco to the chief clerk for total claimed expenses in the
amount of $1,296.56. Since the travel expense reimbursement report was marked
approved by council president, the chief clerk assumed that Hoover had cleared the
expenses with council president even though he did not review or approve Hoover's
expenses. The city finance director then reviewed the expenses associated with Hoover's
trip and approved the travel expense report. A check in the amount of $1,296.56 was
issued by the finance department to Hoover on October 21, 2002.
Although the City of Allentown has a pension board which controls investments for
the city's pension account on behalf of city employees, Hoover is not a member of that
board. No decisions are made by council regarding investment options. Hoover never
provided council or the pension board with any report concerning her attendance at the
real estate pension seminar. Hoover's attendance at the real estate seminar did not
benefit the City of Allentown, only herself as a licensed real estate agent.
Even though Hoover's trip to San Francisco was not related to her position as a
member of Allentown City Council, she received travel related expenses in the amount of
$1,296.56. As such, Hoover received a pecuniary benefit of $1,296.56 for expenses paid
by Allentown while attending the seminar of a personal nature in San Francisco, California.
See, Fact Finding 42.
As an elected city council member, Hoover is required to file SFI's with the city on a
calendar year basis. Although Hoover filed an SFI for the calendar year 2000, Hoover
failed to file an SFI for the 2001 calendar year by May 1, 2002. As for the SFI which
Hoover filed on April 1, 2003, ostensibly for the calendar 2002 in that she did not list the
calendar year, Hoover failed to disclose sources of income of $1,300 or more and a gift in
excess of $250.00 on the 2002 calendar year SFI.
Having highlighted the Stipulated Findings and issues before us, we shall now apply
the Ethics Act to determine the proper disposition of this case.
The parties' Consent Agreement sets forth a proposed resolution of the allegations.
The Consent Agreement proposes that this Commission find:
"a. The Investigative Division will recommend an unintentional violation of Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Hoover submitted and received
reimbursement for travel expenses, including airfare, meals, lodging and limousine
service for travel to San Francisco not related to her position as a member of
Allentown City Council.
b. By agreement of the parties, all charges related to Hoover's trip to Puerto Rico are
dismissed.
c. That a violation of Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act occurred when Hoover failed to
file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2001 by May 1, 2002.
d. That a violation of Section 1105(b)(5), (6) of the Ethics Act occurred when Hoover
failed to list sources of income and gifts received on the Statement of Financial
Interests filed for the 2002 calendar year."
In addition, Hoover agrees to pay $1,000.00 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
through this Commission within 30 days of the issuance of this order and file an SFI for the
2001 calendar year, as well as file an amended SFI for the 2002 calendar year disclosing
all sources of income and the gift received.
In applying the provisions of Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act to the stipulated
findings, there were uses of authority of office on the part of Hoover as an Allentown City
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 13
Council Member. But for the fact that Hoover is a city council member, she could have not
been in a position to direct the council secretary to book her flight to San Francisco and
make the various arrangements for Hoover to attend the real estate seminar offered by
SRI. Further, as a council member, Hoover used the authority of her office to submit
reimbursement and receive $1,296.56 from the city finance department. Such actions
were uses of authority of office. See, Juliante, Order 809. Such uses of authority of office
resulted in a private pecuniary benefit to Hoover. In this regard, city paid expenses for
seminars must relate to the operation of the city government. In this case, the real estate
seminar was only helpful to Hoover in her private capacity as a real estate agent and not
as a member of city council who had no involvement with real estate investments as to city
pension funds. Since there was no authorization as per city regulations for such travel, the
city paid expense reimbursement that Hoover received for traveling to San Francisco was
a private pecuniary benefit that was not authorized in law. Lastly, such private pecuniary
benefit inured to Hoover herself. Accordingly, Hoover unintentionally violated Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she submitted and received reimbursement for travel
expenses for a trip to San Francisco that did not relate to her position as a member of
Allentown City Council. See, Sullivan, Order 1245; Costenbader- Jacobson, Order 1236.
We note that as part of the negotiation process for a Consent Agreement that the
Investigative Division has opted to dismiss the charges that relate to Hoover's trip to
Puerto Rico. Since the Investigative Division in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion
has chosen to non pros this particular allegation, we need merely note that that particular
allegation has been dismissed.
Turning to the SFI allegations, the stipulated findings reflect that Hoover failed to
file an SFI for the calendar year 2001 by May 1, 2002. Accordingly, Hoover violated
Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when she failed to file an SFI for the calendar year 2001
by May 1, 2002. If Hoover has not already done so, she is directed within 30 days of the
date of issuance of this order to file an SFI for the 2001 calendar year with the City of
Allentown and file a copy with this Commission for compliance verification purposes.
For the SFI 2002 calendar year, the stipulated findings reflect that Hoover failed to
list sources of income of $1,300 or more and a gift in excess of $250.00 on her SFI. See,
Fact Findings 16, 43. Accordingly, Hoover violated Section 5(b)(5), (6)/1105(b)(5), (6) of
the Ethics Act when she failed to list sources of income and a gift on her SFI for the
calendar year 2002. If Hoover has not already done so, she is directed to file an amended
SFI for calendar year 2002 within 30 days of the date of issuance of this order listing all
sources of income of $1,300 or more and the gift with the original SFI filed with the City of
Allentown and a copy filed with this Commission for compliance verification purposes.
We determine that the Consent Agreement submitted by the parties sets forth the
proper disposition for this case, based upon our review as reflected in the above analysis
and the totality of the facts and circumstances. Accordingly, Hoover is directed to pay
$1,000.00 to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through this Commission within 30 days
of the issuance of this order and file as directed above an SFI for the 2001 calendar year,
as well as file an amended SFI for the 2002 calendar year disclosing all sources of income
and the gift received. Compliance with the foregoing will result in the closing of this case
with no further action by this Commission. Noncompliance will result in the institution of an
order enforcement action.
IV. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
1. Hoover, as a member of Allentown City Council, is a public official subject to the
provisions of Act 9 of 1989 as codified by Act 93 of 1998.
2. Hoover unintentionally violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she
submitted and received reimbursement for travel expenses for a trip to San
Francisco that did not relate to her position as a member of Allentown City Council.
Hoover, 03 -031
Page 14
3. Hoover violated Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when she failed to file an SFI for
the calendar year 2001 by May 1, 2002.
4. Hoover violated Section 1105(b)(5), (6) of the Ethics Act when she failed to list
sources of income of $1,300.00 or more and a gift in excess of $250.00 on her SFI
for the calendar year 2002.
In Re: Gail Hoover
ORDER NO. 1348
File Docket: 03 -031
Date Decided: 11/29/04
Date Mailed: 12/8/04
1 Hoover, as a member of Allentown City Council, unintentionally violated Section
1103(a) of the Ethics Act when she submitted and received reimbursement for
travel expenses for a trip to San Francisco that did not relate to her position as a
member of Allentown City Council.
2. Hoover violated Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act when she failed to file a
Statement of Financial Interests for the calendar year 2001 by May 1, 2002.
3. Hoover violated Section 1105(b)(5), (6) of the Ethics Act when she failed to list
sources of income of $1,300.00 or more and a gift in excess of $250.00 on her
Statement of Financial Interests for the calendar year 2002.
4. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Hoover is directed to pay $1,000.00 to
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania through this Commission within thirty (30) days
of the issuance of this order.
5. If Hoover has not already done so, she is directed within 30 days of the date of
issuance of this order to file a Statement of Financial Interests for the 2001
calendar year with the City of Allentown and file a copy with this Commission for
compliance verification purposes.
6. If Hoover has not already done so, she is directed to file an amended Statement of
Financial Interests for calendar year 2002 within 30 days of the date of issuance of
this order listing all sources of income of $1,300 or more, the gift in excess of
$250.00, with the original filed with the City of Allentown and a copy filed with this
Commission for compliance verification purposes.
7 Compliance with the paragraphs 4, 5, and 6 will result in the closing of this case
with no further action by this Commission. Non - compliance will result in the
institution of an order enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
Louis W. Fryman, Chair