HomeMy WebLinkAbout319-S O'HANLONIn Re: Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire
File Docket:
X -ref:
Date Decided:
Date Mailed:
Before: Louis W. Fryman, Chair
John J. Bolger, Vice Chair
Donald M. McCurdy
Paul M. Henry
Raquel K. Bergen
Nicholas A. Colafella
06 -099 -P
Order No. 319 -S
3/28/07
4/11/07
This is a final adjudication of the State Ethics Commission as to the alleged
delinquency and /or deficiency of Statement of Financial Interests required to be filed
pursuant to Sections 1104 and 1105 of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act
( "Ethics Act "), 65 P.S. § 1101 et seq.
The Investigative Division initiated these proceedings by filing with the State Ethics
Commission and serving upon Respondent a Petition for Civil Penalties. An Order to
Show Cause was issued to Respondent. An Answer was filed by the Respondent, and a
hearing that included both testimony and oral argument was held on January 11, 2007.
The record is complete.
This is a final Order, and it is publicly available upon issuance. Reconsideration
may be requested, but a request for reconsideration will not affect the finality of this
adjudication or its availability as a public document. Any reconsideration request must be
received at this Commission within thirty days of the mailing date noted above 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).
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 2
I. FINDINGS:
A. Pleadings
1 Respondent is an adult individual who resides or maintains a mailing address at
Disabilities Law Project, 1901 Law & Finance Building, 429 Fourth Avenue,
Pittsburgh, PA 15219.
2. At all times relevant to these proceedings, Respondent was a Member of the
Pennsylvania Developmental Disabilities Council (hereinafter, "DDC ").
3. By Notice letter dated October 27, 2005, Respondent was served with Notice in
accordance with Section 1107(5) of the Ethics Act of the allegations that he had
failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC
and the State Ethics Commission. The Notice letter provided Respondent an
opportunity to avoid the institution of civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate
and complete Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 within twenty
days of the date of the Notice letter.
4. By Notice letter dated January 31, 2006, Respondent was served with Notice in
accordance with Section 1107(5) of the Ethics Act of the allegations that he had
failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC
and the State Ethics Commission. The Notice letter provided Respondent an
opportunity to avoid the institution of civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate
and complete Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 within twenty
days of the date of the Notice letter.
5. Respondent denies that he failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests for
calendar year 2004, and he asserts that he refused to file a Statement of Financial
Interests for calendar year 2004 because in his capacity as a Member of the DDC,
he was not a "public official" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act.
B. Testimon
6. Respondent Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire, is a former Member of the DDC.
a. Respondent testified that he has advocated for low income individuals and
individuals with disabilities throughout his career as an attorney, first through
his employment with the Legal Services program in Pittsburgh and later
through his employment with the Disabilities Law Project.
b. Respondent stated that because of his advocacy skills and his status as an
individual with a disability, he was recruited to serve on the DDC in the mid -
1990s.
c. Respondent testified that as a Member of the DDC, he advocated for people
with disabilities and was involved with various projects, including a program
to address the lack of accessible public transportation in rural areas of
Pennsylvania.
d. Respondent stated that he was not compensated for his service on the DDC,
and he rarely requested reimbursement for his expenses.
e. Respondent testified that prior to receiving a Notice letter from the State
Ethics Commission in 2005, there had been no indication that he was
expected or required to complete a Statement of Financial Interests due to
his service on the DDC.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 3
f. Respondent testified that he resigned from the DDC in August 2006 after he
received the Notice letter from the State Ethics Commission.
g.
Respondent testified that he would never have accepted a position on the
DDC if he would have known that he would be required to file a Statement of
Financial Interests as a condition of serving in said position.
h. Respondent stated that as a Member of the DDC, he did not have the
authority to expend public funds, and his authority was limited to making
recommendations.
C. Documents
7 Exhibit ID -1 is a photocopy of Section 15006 ( "State control of operations ") of the
Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (P.L. 106 -402),
42 USCS § 15006.
8. Exhibit ID -2 consists of a photocopy of Section 15025 ( "State Councils on
Developmental Disabilities and designated State agencies ") of the Developmental
Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (P.L. 106 -402), 42 USCS §
15025.
9. Exhibit ID -3 is a photocopy of Executive Order 1997 -2, signed May 30, 1997, by
Governor Thomas J. Ridge, reestablishing the DDC, formerly known as the
Developmental Disabilities Planning Council.
10. Exhibit ID -4 is a photocopy of Section 1102 ( "Definitions ") of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102.
11. Exhibit ID -5 consists of a photocopy of Section 11.1 ( "Definitions ") of the
Regulations of the State Ethics Commission, 51 Pa.Code § 11.1.
12. Exhibit ID -6 is a photocopy of Becker, Order 270 -S, a civil penalty Order issued by
the State Ethics Commission on June 12, 2006, in which the State Ethics
Commission found that the respondent, as a Member of the DDC, was a public
official subject to the Ethics Act and specifically, the requirements for filing
Statements of Financial Interests.
13. Exhibit ID -7 is a photocopy of a Notice letter from the State Ethics Commission
dated October 27, 2005, addressed to Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire, Disabilities Law
Project, 1901 Law & Finance Building, 429 Fourth Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15219.
(1) The Notice letter provided Respondent an opportunity to avoid the institution
of civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate and complete Statement of
Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 within twenty (20) days of the date
of the Notice letter.
(2) The Notice letter directed Respondent to file the white copy of the Statement
of Financial Interests with the State Ethics Commission, the yellow copy with
the DDC, and a photocopy with the Secretary for Administration.
14. Exhibit ID -8 consists of a photocopy of a Final Notice letter from the State Ethics
Commission dated January 13, 2006, addressed to Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire,
Disabilities Law Project, 1901 Law & Finance Building, 429 Fourth Avenue,
Pittsburgh, PA 15219.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 4
(1) The Final Notice letter was sent by Certified Mail # 7005- 2570 - 0001 -4487-
2077.
(2) The Final Notice letter provided Respondent an opportunity to avoid the
institution of civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate and complete
Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 within twenty (20)
days of the date of the Final Notice letter.
The Final Notice letter directed Respondent to file the white copy of the
Statement of Financial Interests with the State Ethics Commission, the
yellow copy with the DDC, and a photocopy with the Secretary for
Administration.
(3)
(4) The Final Notice letter was received and signed for by Sharon Baur on
January 24, 2006.
15. Exhibit ID -9, p. 1 is a photocopy of an Order to Show Cause issued by the Chair of
the State Ethics Commission to Respondent, ordering Respondent to show cause
why a civil penalty should not be levied against him.
(1) Exhibit ID -9, pp. 2 -3 consists of a photocopy of a Notice of Proceeding to
Levy Civil Penalty Pursuant to Section 65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(f) that was issued
to Respondent by the Investigative Division, together with the Petition for
Civil Penalties referenced in Finding No. 15(2) below.
(2) Exhibit ID -9, pp. 4-5 consists of a photocopy of a Petition for Civil Penalties
that the Investigative Division filed with the State Ethics Commission against
Respondent, alleging that Respondent failed to file a Statement of Financial
Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC and the State Ethics
Commission.
(3)
Exhibit ID -9, pp. 6 -11 consists of photocopies of the Notice letter and Final
Notice letter respectively identified as Exhibits ID -7 and ID -8 above.
16. Exhibit ID -10, pp. 1 -5 consists of a photocopy of a Response to Order to Show
Cause — Response to Petition for Civil Penalties filed with the State Ethics
Commission by Respondent, averring as New Matter that Members of the DDC do
not have the authority to expend public funds.
(1) Exhibit ID -10, pp. 6 -7 consists of a photocopy of a letter dated October 25,
2005, from Graham Mulholland, Executive Director of the DDC, to
Respondent, informing Respondent that he needed to complete a Statement
of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004.
17. Exhibit ID -11 is a photocopy of an Answer to New Matter Raised by Respondent
filed by the Investigative Division, denying in pertinent part that Members of the
DDC do not have the authority to expend public funds.
18. Exhibit ID -12 is a photocopy of a letter dated January 7, 2003, from Mark S.
Schweiker, Governor, to Respondent, informing Respondent of his reappointment
as a Member of the DDC.
II. DISCUSSION:
At all times relevant to this matter, the Respondent, Paul W. O'Hanlon ( "O'Hanlon "),
was a Member of the DDC.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 5
The allegations are that O'Hanlon, as a Member of the DDC, was a "public official"
subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65
Pa.C.S. § 1101, et seq., and that O'Hanlon failed to comply with Section 1104(a) of the
Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), when he failed to file a Statement of Financial Interests
for calendar year 2004 with the DDC and the State Ethics Commission.
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
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).
The complete financial disclosure which a public official /public employee is required
to provide in the Statement of Financial Interests form is statutorily mandated in detail at
Section 1105 of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1105.
Section 1109(f) of the Ethics Act provides as follows:
§1109. Penalties
(f) Civil Penalty. -- In addition to any other civil remedy
or criminal penalty provided for in this chapter, the commission
may, after notice has been served in accordance with section
1107(5) (relating to powers and duties of commission) and
upon a majority vote of its members, levy a civil penalty upon
any person subject to this chapter who fails to file a statement
of financial interests in a timely manner or who files a deficient
statement of financial interests, at a rate of not more than $25
for each day such statement remains delinquent or deficient.
The maximum penalty payable under this paragraph is $250.
65 Pa.C.S. § 1109(f).
Having noted the issue and the applicable law, we shall now summarize the
relevant facts. O'Hanlon began serving on the DDC in the mid- 1990s, and he was
reappointed to the DDC by Governor Mark Schweiker on January 7, 2003. O'Hanlon
resigned from the DDC in August 2006.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 6
Procedurally, in accordance with Section 1107(5) of the Ethics Act, on October 27,
2005, the State Ethics Commission sent a Notice of Intent to Commence Civil Penalty
Proceedings (Notice letter) to O'Hanlon stating that O'Hanlon had failed to file a Statement
of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004. The Notice letter provided O'Hanlon an
opportunity to avoid the institution of civil penalty proceedings by filing an accurate and
complete Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 within twenty (20) days of
the date of the Notice letter. O'Hanlon did not file a Statement of Financial Interests.
A Final Notice letter containing the same substantive information as the first Notice
letter was sent to O'Hanlon. Once again, O'Hanlon did not file a Statement of Financial
Interests.
The Investigative Division then instituted formal proceedings against O'Hanlon by
filing with the State Ethics Commission and serving upon him a Petition for Civil Penalties.
The Commission Chair issued an Order to Show Cause, ordering O'Hanlon to show cause
why a civil penalty should not be levied against him. O'Hanlon filed an Answer to the
Order to Show Cause and requested a hearing.
Following the hearing, the Investigative Division of the State Ethics Commission
filed a brief in support of its position. The Investigative Division argues that: O'Hanlon has
been a Member of the DDC at all times relevant to these proceedings; the DDC is a state
body possessing authority that extends beyond purely advisory functions; and Members of
the DDC are "public officials" subject to the provisions of the Ethics Act and particularly,
the requirements to file Statements of Financial Interests. The Investigative Division
further argues that O'Hanlon should be assessed a civil penalty in the amount of Two -
Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($250) for failing to file a Statement of Financial Interests for
calendar year 2004.
By way of oral argument at the hearing held on January 11, 2007, and a brief filed
with the State Ethics Commission, O'Hanlon proffers the following arguments: in Schwartz,
Advice of Counsel, 91 -540, issued May 17, 1991, and Schwartz, Advice of Counsel, 92-
623, issued September 3, 1992, the State Ethics Commission determined that a Member of
the Developmental Disabilities Planning Counsel (the predecessor of the DDC) was not a
public official as that term is defined in the Ethics Act; prior to 2005, the State Ethics
Commission had not required DDC Members to file Statements of Financial Interests; as a
Member of the DDC, O'Hanlon had no authority to expend public funds; O'Hanlon was not
asked, and he never agreed, to provide full financial disclosure as a condition of serving
on the DDC; and O'Hanlon, in his capacity as a Member of the DDC, was not a "public
official" as that term is defined in the Ethics Act.
We must now determine whether as a Member of the DDC, O'Hanlon was a public
official subject to the Ethics Act.
The term "public official" is defined in the Ethics Act as follows:
§ 1102. Definitions
"Public official." Any person elected by the public or
elected or appointed by a governmental body or an appointed
official in the executive, legislative or judicial branch of this
Commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, provided
that it shall not include members of advisory boards that have
no authority to expend public funds other than reimbursement
for personal expense or to otherwise exercise the power of the
State or any political subdivision thereof.
65 Pa. C. S. § 1102.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 7
The regulations of the State Ethics Commission similarly define the term "public
official" and set forth the following additional criteria that are used to determine whether
the advisory board exception applies:
(i) The following criteria will be used to determine if
the exception in this paragraph is applicable:
(A) The body will be deemed to have the power to
expend public funds if the body may commit funds or may
otherwise make payment of monies, enter into contracts, invest
funds held in reserves, make loans or grants, borrow money,
issue bonds, employ staff, purchase, lease, acquire or sell real
or personal property without the consent or approval of the
governing body and the effect of the power to expend public
funds has a greater than de minimis economic impact on the
interest of a person.
(B) The body will be deemed to have the authority to
otherwise exercise the power of the Commonwealth or a
political subdivision if one of the following exists:
(I) The body makes binding decisions or orders
adjudicating substantive issues which are appealable to a
body or person other than the governing authority.
(II) The body exercises a basic power of government
and performs essential governmental functions.
(III) The governing authority is bound by statute or
ordinance to accept and enforce the rulings of the body.
(IV) The body may compel the governing authority to
act in accordance with the body's decisions or restrain the
governing authority from acting contrary to the body's
decisions.
(V) The body makes independent decisions which are
effective without approval of the governing authority.
(VI) The body may adopt, amend and repeal
resolutions, rules, regulations or ordinances.
(VII) The body has the power of eminent domain or
condemnation.
(VIII)The enabling legislation of the body indicates that
the body is established for exercising public powers of the
Commonwealth or a political subdivision.
(ii) The term does not include judges and inspectors
of elections, notary publics and political party officers.
(iii) The term generally includes persons in the
following offices:
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 8
(A) Incumbents of offices filled by nomination of the
Governor and confirmation of the Senate.
(B) Heads of executive, legislative and independent
agencies, boards and commissions.
(C) Members of agencies, boards and commissions
appointed by the General Assembly or its officers.
(D) Persons appointed to positions designated as
officers by the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions.
(E) Members of municipal, industrial development,
housing, parking and similar authorities.
(F) Members of zoning hearing boards and similar
quasi - judicial bodies.
(G) Members of the public bodies meeting the criteria
in paragraph (i)(A).
51 Pa. Code § 11.1.
Status as a "public official" subject to the Ethics Act is determined by applying the
above definition and criteria to the position held. The Commonwealth Court of
Pennsylvania has directed that coverage under the Ethics Act be construed broadly and
that exclusions under the Ethics Act be construed narrowly. See, Philips v. State Ethics
Commission, 470 A.2d 659 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1984).
Initially, we note that the status of DDC Members under the Ethics Act was first
addressed by this Commission in Schwartz, Advice of Counsel, 91 -540. At that time, the
DDC was named the "Developmental Disabilities Planning Council" ( "DDPC ") and was
operating under a different federal statute than the one in effect at all times relevant to
these proceedings. Based upon the federal statute in effect in 1991, it was determined
that the DDPC Member who was the subject of the request was not a public official subject
to the Ethics Act. Subsequently, in 1992, a second Advice of Counsel was issued
regarding the same DDPC Member. The second Advice of Counsel, Schwartz, Advice of
Counsel, 92 -623, reiterated that the DDPC Member was not considered a public official
subject to the Ethics Act.
We further note that subsequent to the issuance of the aforementioned Advices of
Counsel, the federal statute that governed the operation of the DDPC was substantially
amended. The DDPC was reestablished as the DDC by Executive Order 1997 -2, signed
May 30, 1997, by Governor Thomas Ridge. At all times relevant to these proceedings, the
operation of the DDC was governed by the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and Bill
of Rights Act of 2000.
We take administrative notice that the Developmental Disabilities Assistance and
Bill of Rights Act of 2000 provides, in pertinent part, as follows:
§ 15022. State allotments
(a) Allotments.
(1) In general.
(A) Authority. For each fiscal year, the Secretary [of Health
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 9
and Human Services] shall, in accordance with regulations
and this paragraph, allot the sums appropriated for such
year under section 129 [42 USCS § 15029] among the
States.....
(B) Use of funds. Sums allotted to the States under this
section shall be used to pay for the Federal share of the
cost of carrying out projects in accordance with State plans
approved under Section 124 [42 USCS § 15024] for the
provision under such plans of services for individuals with
developmental disabilities.
42 USCS §§ 15022(a)(1)(A) and (B).
§ 15025. State Councils on Developmental Disabilities and
designated State agencies
(a) In general. Each State that receives assistance under this
subtitle [42 USCS §§ 15021 et seq.] shall establish and
maintain a Council to undertake advocacy, capacity building,
and systemic change activities ... that contribute to a
coordinated, consumer- and family- centered, consumer- and
family- directed, comprehensive system of community services,
individualized supports, and other forms of assistance that
contribute to the achievement of the purpose of this subtitle
[42 USCS §§ 15021 et seq.]. The Council shall have the
authority to fulfill the responsibilities described in subsection
(c).
(b) Council membership.
(1) Council appointments.
(A) In general. The members of the Council of a State
shall be appointed by the Governor of the State from
among the residents of that State.
(c) Council responsibilities.
(1) In general. A Council, through Council members, staff,
consultants, contractors, or subgrantees, shall have the
responsibilities described in paragraphs (2) through (10).
(2) Advocacy, capacity building, and systemic change
activities. The Council shall serve as an advocate for
individuals with developmental disabilities and conduct or
support programs, projects, and activities that carry out the
purpose of this subtitle [42 USCS §§ 15021 et seq.].
(4) State plan development. The Council shall develop the
State plan and submit the State plan to the Secretary [of
Health and Human Services] after consultation with the
designated State Agency [the agency which provides
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 10
support to the Council] under the State plan. Such
consultation shall be solely for the purposes of obtaining
State assurances and ensuring consistency of the plan with
State law.
(5) State plan implementation.
(A) In general. The Council shall implement the State
plan by conducting and supporting advocacy, capacity
building, and systemic change activities .....
(6) Review of designated State agency. The Council shall
periodically review the designated State agency and
activities carried out under this subtitle [42 USCS §§ 15021
et seq.] by the designated State agency and make any
recommendations for change to the Governor.
(8) Budget. Each Council shall prepare, approve, and
implement a budget using amounts paid to the State under
this subtitle [42 USCS §§ 15021 et seq.] to fund and
implement all programs, projects, and activities carried out
under this subtitle [42 USCS §§ 15021 et seq.], including --
(B) hiring and maintaining such numbers and types of
staff ... and obtaining the services of such professional,
consulting, technical, and clerical staff ... consistent with
State law, as the Council determines to be necessary to
carry out the functions of the Council under this
subtitle....
(C) directing the expenditure of funds for grants,
contracts, interagency agreements that are binding
contracts, and other activities authorized by the State
plan....
42 USCS §§ 15025(a), (b)(1), (c)(1), (c)(2), (c)(4), (c)(5)(A), (c)(6), (c)(8)(B), (c)(8)(C).
In applying the Ethics Act's definition of "public official," the first portion of the
definition provides that a public official is a person who: (1) is elected by the public; (2) is
elected or appointed by a governmental body; or (3) is an appointed official in the
executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Commonwealth or a political subdivision of
the Commonwealth. Muscalus, Opinion 02 -007. Given that O'Hanlon was appointed to
the DDC by Governor Schweiker, he would fall within the second category above. See,
Cohen, Opinion 03 -006. Furthermore, given that the DDC was established /reestablished
by an Executive Order of Governor Thomas Ridge (Executive Order 1997 -2), the
necessary conclusion is that the DDC is a governmental body within the executive branch
of the Commonwealth. Therefore, O'Hanlon, as an appointed official in the executive
branch of the Commonwealth, would also fall within the third category above. Cf.,
Williams, Opinion 03 -002. The first portion of the definition is satisfied.
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 11
In order for a member of a body to qualify under the exception to the definition of
"public official" as set forth in the Ethics Act, the body served must be an advisory board
that has no authority to expend public funds other than reimbursement for personal
expense or to otherwise exercise the power of the State or any political subdivision
thereof." 65 Pa.C.S. § 1102. In considering the powers and duties of the DDC, it is clear
that although the DDC performs some advisory functions, for purposes of applying the
Ethics Act, the DDC goes beyond advisory functions. Under the current federal statutory
provisions set forth above, in addition to the functions of advocacy, development of the
State plan, and preparation of annual reports that existed under prior federal statutes, the
DDC actually implements the State plan. The DDC now conducts reviews of the
"designated State agency" and its activities and recommends changes to the Governor.
The DDC continues to have the authority it previously had to prepare, approve, and
implement a budget using amounts paid to the State under federal law. The current
federal statute specifically provides for such budgets to cover not only the funding of
programs, projects, and activities and the hiring of staff and securing of services, but also
the direction of the expenditure of funds for, inter alia, grants, contracts, and interagency
agreements that are binding contracts. Therefore, O'Hanlon would not qualify for
exclusion from the definition of "public official" because the DDC is not a purely advisory
board. Cf., Cope, Order 143 -S -R; Williams, Opinion 03 -002.
As a Member of the DDC, O'Hanlon had the statutory authority and /or responsibility
to participate in these activities, which meet the definition and the criteria by which status
as a "public official" is determined. Therefore, based upon the above judicial directives,
the provisions of the Ethics Act, this Commission's Regulations, and the opinions of this
Commission, in light of the above duties and responsibilities, the necessary conclusion is
that as a Member of the DDC, O'Hanlon was a "public official" subject to the financial
reporting and disclosure requirements of the Ethics Act.
Having confirmed O'Hanlon's status as a public official required to file Statements of
Financial Interests under the Ethics Act, we note that O'Hanlon has acknowledged that he
refused to file a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC and
the State Ethics Commission. Pursuant to Section 1109(f) of the Ethics Act, a maximum
civil penalty could lawfully be imposed against O'Hanlon in this case.
However, it is our view that there are mitigating circumstances in this case which
justify the imposition of a lesser civil penalty. See, State Ethics Commission Resolution
91 -002.
We determine that O'Hanlon's violation of the filing requirement was not the result
of disdain for the Ethics Act but rather was the result of a genuine belief that as a Member
of the DDC, he was not a public official subject to the financial reporting and disclosure
requirements of the Ethics Act. Upon review of the circumstances in this case, we find that
a civil penalty in the total amount of One - Hundred Dollars ($100.00) is warranted.
O'Hanlon shall be ordered to make pgyment of the above civil penalty in the amount
of $100.00 by no later than the thirtieth (30 day after the mailing date of this Order, by
forwarding a check to this Commission made payable to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania, for deposit in the State Treasury.
O'Hanlon shall be ordered to file a complete and accurate Statement of Financial
Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC and this Commission within 30 days of the
issuance of this adjudication and Order.
Failure to comply with any provision of this Order will result in the initiation of an
appropriate enforcement action.
III. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
O'Hanlon, 06 -099 -P
Page 12
1 Paul W. O'Hanlon ( "O'Hanlon "), Esquire, as a Member of the Developmental
Disabilities Council, was at all times relevant to these proceedings a "public official"
subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics
Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. §1101 et seq.
2. O'Hanlon, as a Member of the Developmental Disabilities Council, failed to comply
with Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1104(a), when he failed to file a
Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 with the Developmental
Disabilities Council and the State Ethics Commission.
3. Notice of the delinquency of O'Hanlon's Statement of Financial Interests for
calendar year 2004 was previously served upon him in accordance with Section
1107(5) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §1107(5).
4. Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, a civil penalty in the total
amount of $100.00 is warranted.
IN RE: Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire,
Respondent
File Docket: 06 -099 -P
Date Decided: 3/28/07
Date Mailed: 4/11/07
ORDER NO. 319 -S
1 Paul W. O'Hanlon, Esquire ( "O'Hanlon "), as a Member of the Developmental
Disabilities Council, failed to comply with Section 1104(a) of the Public Official and
Employee Ethics Act ( "Ethics Act "), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), when he failed to file a
Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2004 with the Developmental
Disabilities Council and the State Ethics Commission.
2. This Commission hereby levies one civil penalty against O'Hanlon in the total
amount of One - Hundred Dollars ($100.00) for his failure to file his Statement of
Financial Interests for calendar year 2004. O'Hanlon is ordered to pay the said civil
penalty in the total amount of $100.00 within 30 days of the issuance of this Order,
by forwarding a check to this Commission payable to the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania for deposit in the State Treasury.
3. O'Hanlon is ordered to file a complete and accurate Statement of Financial
Interests for calendar year 2004 with the DDC and this Commission within 30 days
of issuance of this Order.
4. Failure to comply with any provision of this Order will result in the initiation of an
appropriate enforcement action.
BY THE COMMISSION,
Louis W. Fryman, Chair