Source: http://www.scribd.com/doc/45699664/N-Y-Commission-on-Public-Integrity-final-decision-on-Gov-David-Paterson-s-acquisition-of-World-Series-tickets
Timestamp: 2015-01-29 15:33:51
Document Index: 671811860

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 941', '§73', '§74', '§73', 'art 941', '§73', '§73', '§74', '§73', '§73']

N.Y. Commission on Public Integrity final decision on Gov. David Paterson's acquisition of World Series tickets
P. 1N.Y. Commission on Public Integrity final decision on Gov. David Paterson's acquisition of World Series ticketsN.Y. Commission on Public Integrity final decision on Gov. David Paterson's acquisition of World Series ticketsRatings: (0)|Views: 328|Likes: 0Published by The Post-StandardMore info:Published by: The Post-Standard on Dec 20, 2010Copyright:Attribution Non-commercialAvailability:Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate content|Add to collectionSee moreSee lesshttps://www.scribd.com/doc/45699664/N-Y-Commission-on-Public-Integrity-final-decision-on-Gov-David-Paterson-s-acquisition-of-World-Series-tickets12/20/2010pdftextoriginal STATE OF NEW YORKCOMMISSION ON PUBLIC INTEGRITY540 BroadwayAlbany, NY 12207 IN THE MATTER OF AN INVESTIGATION INTOGOVERNOR DAVID A. PATERSON’SACQUISITION OF WORLD SERIES TICKETS,GOVERNOR DAVID A. PATERSON,Respondent.DECISION andNOTICE OFCIVIL ASSESSMENTThe New York State Commission on Public Integrity (“Commission”), at its December 9,2010 meeting, considered the Hearing Officer’s Findings of Fact and Recommendation(“Hearing Officer’s Decision,” which is attached as Exhibit A) in the Matter of an Investigationinto Governor David A. Paterson’s Acquisition of World Series Tickets, Governor David A.Paterson, Respondent (“Governor”). In accordance with 19 NYCRR Part 941.15(c), the HearingOfficer’s Decision is incorporated herein by reference and made part of this Decision and Noticeof Civil Assessment. The Commission adopts the Hearing Officer’s findings of fact. TheCommission agrees with and adopts the Hearing Officer’s legal conclusions that the Governorknowingly and intentionally violated Public Officers Law §§73(5)(a), 73(5)(b), 74(3)(d) and74(3)(h) but modifies the Hearing Officer’s legal analysis, as set forth below. For the reasons setforth below, we also modify the Hearing Officer’s Decision insofar as the Commissiondetermines that the Governor violated Public Officers Law §74(3)(f). Finally, the Commissionalso modifies the Hearing Officer’s Decision with respect to the civil penalty assessment andassesses a civil penalty of $62,125.
On March 3, 2010, the Commission issued a Notice of Reasonable Cause (“NORC”)alleging that the Governor had violated Public Officers Law §§73(5)(a), 73(5)(b), 74(3)(d),74(3)(f) and 74(3)(h). (Hearing Officer’s Decision at p. 1) The alleged violations arose out of the Governor’s alleged solicitation, acceptance and receipt of five complimentary tickets toGame One of the 2009 World Series at Yankee Stadium (“Game One”) for himself, two aides,his teenage son and his son’s friend.The Hearing Officer exercised her discretion to conduct the hearing on August 17, 2010
after a showing that the Governor and his representative of record had been properlynotified of the pending hearing and the Governor, through his counsel, stated he would notparticipate. (Hearing Officer’s Decision at p. 1; Exs. 35, 36, 37, 38; Hearing Tr. at pp. 11-12,13-14;
19 NYCRR Part 941.12).
HEARING OFFICER CORRECTLY DETERMINED THE FACTS
The Hearing Officer correctly determined the facts. The Commission hereby adopts thefindings of fact set forth by the Hearing Officer (Hearing Officer’s Decision at p. 1-6) andincorporates those findings herein by reference.
HEARING OFFICER’S CONCLUSION OF LAW
The Commission agrees with and adopts the Hearing Officer’s determination that theGovernor knowingly and intentionally violated Public Officers Law §§73(5)(a), 73(5)(b),74(3)(d) and 74(3)(h), but as discussed below, the Commission modifies the Hearing Officer’slegal analysis with respect to the Governor’s violation of §§73(5)(a) and (b). The Commissionalso determines that the Governor violated Public Officers Law §74(3)(f) and modifies theHearing Officer’s Decision accordingly.
A. Public Officers Law §73(5)(b): The Governor’s Untruthful Testimony
The Commission determines that the Governor knowingly and intentionally violatedPublic Officers Law §73(5)(a) when he solicited, accepted and received five complimentarytickets to Game One. The Commission also determines that the Governor’s false and misleadingtestimony regarding his pre-game intention personally to pay for two of the five tickets, thoseused by his son and his son’s friend, and that the two tickets used by aides would also be paidfor, is material to the Commission’s determination.In this regard, the Hearing Officer’s Decision states:Much was made at the hearing about the fact that the decision to offer payment at somepoint seemed to have been made after the game and likely in reaction to the inquiry by areporter. While it is reasonable to assume that this was the case, the record is not crystalclear on this issue. Various parties testified to the timing of the actual payments, and tothe timing of the intent to make said payments. In addition, an issue was raised aboutwhether or not the Governor actually made out and signed the check that he ultimatelyused to pay for the teenager’s tickets. The Governor claimed that he intended to pay, forthe teenagers at least, at the game and only attended to it a day or so later, and the recordshows that no payment was made until sometime after Game 1. Thus, it is not necessaryto find exactly when the Governor intended to pay because the fact is that neither he northe other guests at Game 1 made payment to the Yankees until sometime after the Game.Likewise, the issue of who actually wrote or signed the check is immaterial, especially inlight of the Governor’s disability which makes it likely that others often write and signdocuments for him . . . .(Hearing Officer’s Decision at p. 9).We disagree with this aspect of the Hearing Officer’s Decision for the following reasons.First, there is no record evidence that “others often write and sign documents for [theGovernor].” (Hearing Officer’s Decision at p. 9) With respect to the specific check at issue, theGovernor himself testified that he wrote all but the payee section and signed the check.(Paterson Tr. at p. 6).
Peter Kauffmann, the Governor’s Communications Director, testified
The transcript of the Governor’s sworn interview conducted by the Commission on February 24, 2010 wasadmitted into evidence as Commission Exhibit 40. This transcript
will be cited at “Paterson Tr.”