In Re ,Wendall Hannum Complaint No. 09-081, Final Order

BEFORE THE

STATE OF FLORIDA

COMMISSION ON ETHICS

In re WENDALL HANNUM,

Respondent.

)

Complaint No. 09-081

DOAH Case No. 10-1568-EC

COE Final Order No. 10-132

This matter comes before the Commission on Ethics, meeting in public session on September 3, 2010, pursuant to the Recommended Order of the Division of Administrative Hearings' Administrative Law Judge rendered in this matter on June 17, 2010. The Recommended Order (a copy of which is attached and incorporated herein by reference), recommends that the Commission enter a final order finding that Wendall Hannum violated Sections 112.313(7) and 112.3143, Florida Statutes, and recommending imposition of a civil penalty of $750.

This matter began with the filing of an ethics complaint in 2009 alleging that the Respondent, Wendall Hannum, a member of the Hamilton County Tourist Development Council, applied for and received grants from that entity. The allegations were found to be legally sufficient and Commission staff undertook a preliminary investigation to aid in the determination of probable cause. In the course of the preliminary investigation, it was revealed that the Respondent may have also violated Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes, by voting to approve grants for his business in 2005 and 2006 and/or by failing to file the requisite Memorandum of Voting Conflict, and a Supplemental Investigation was ordered. On January 27, 2010, the Commission issued an Order finding probable cause to believe that the Respondent violated Section 112.313(7), Florida Statutes, by having a conflicting employment or contractual relationship when, while serving as a Hamilton County Tourist Development Council member, he applied for and was recommended by the Council to receive a grant from Council funds, and violated Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes, by voting to approve funds for his business and/or by failing to file the requisite Memorandum of Voting Conflict.

The matter was then forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) for assignment of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to conduct the formal hearing and prepare a recommended order. Prior to the hearing the parties filed a Joint Prehearing Stipulation and a formal evidentiary hearing was held before the ALJ on May 27, 2010. No transcript was filed with the ALJ and the parties timely filed a Proposed Recommended Orders. The ALJ's Recommended Order was transmitted to the Commission, the Respondent, and the Advocate on June 17, 2010, and the parties were notified of their right to file exceptions to the Recommended Order. No exceptions were filed.

Having reviewed the Recommended Order and the record of the proceedings, the Commission makes the following findings, conclusions, rulings and determinations:

Under Section 120.57(1)(l), Florida Statutes,an agency may reject or modify the conclusions of law over which it has substantive jurisdiction and interpretation of administrative rules over which it has substantive jurisdiction. When rejecting or modifying such conclusions of law or interpretations of administrative rules, the agency must state with particularity its reasons for rejecting or modifying such conclusions of law or interpretations of administrative
rules and must make a finding that its substituted conclusion of law or interpretation of administrative rule is as or more reasonable than that which was rejected or modified. An agency may accept the recommended penalty in a recommended order, but may not reduce or increase it without a review of the complete record and without stating with particularity its reasons therefore in the order, by citing to the record in justifying the action.

The Findings of Fact as set forth in the Recommended Order are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein by reference.

1. The Conclusions of Law as set forth in the Recommended Order are approved, adopted, and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Accordingly, the Commission on Ethics concludes that the Respondent, as a member of the Hamilton County Tourist Development Council, violated Section 112.313(7), Florida Statutes, by having a conflicting employment or contractual relationship when, while serving as a Hamilton County Tourist Development Council member, he applied for and was recommended by the Council to receive a grant from Council funds, and violated Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes, by voting to approve funds for his business and/or by failing to file the requisite Memorandum of Voting Conflict.

The ALJ's recommendation of a civil penalty in the amount of $750 for the Respondent's violation of Sections 112.313(7) and 112.3143, Florida Statutes, is accepted.

DONE and ORDERED by the State of Florida Commission on Ethics meeting in public session on Friday, September 3, 2010.

THIS ORDER CONSTITUTES FINAL AGENCY ACTION. ANY PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS ORDER HAS THE RIGHT TO SEEK JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES, BY FILING A NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL PURSUANT TO RULE 9.110, FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, WITH THE CLERK OF THE COMMISSION ON ETHICS, P.O. DRAWER 15709, TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32317-5709 (physical address at 3600 Maclay Boulevard South, Suite 201, Tallahassee, FL 32312); AND BY FILING A COPY OF THE NOTICE OF APPEAL ATTACHED TO WHICH IS A CONFORMED COPY OF THE ORDER DESIGNATED IN THE NOTICE OF APPEAL ACCOMPANIED BY THE APPLICABLE FILING FEES WITH THE APPROPRIATE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL. THE NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE DATE THIS ORDER IS RENDERED.