Violations of the Codes of Ethics by Public Officials or Lobbyists

1979 - 1999

Docket No. 1999-4  In the Matter of a Complaint against John Savino.  On July 9, 1999, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was a full-time Housing Specialist for the Judicial Branch, he engaged in paid private consulting work as a mediator in two cases then pending in the Connecticut Housing Court, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b) and (c). Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $2,000 and agreed to forego compensation for his private consulting work.

Docket No. 1999-2  In the Matter of a Complaint against Jason Provost.   On April 9, 1999, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent and representatives of the H.H. Ellis Technical School, the employer of Respondent’s father, signed a contract obligating the school to provide the carpentry labor to build a two story Cape home with a two-car garage at below-market value, without going through the open and public process, in violation of CGS 1-84 (i).    Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1500 to the State Ethics Commission, and $6000 to the Department of Education as reimbursement for the construction work performed by the students and staff of H.H. Ellis Technical School.

Docket No. 1999-1  In the Matter of a Complaint against Leo Provost.   On April 9, 1999, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while working at the H.H. Ellis Technical School (“Ellis Tech”), used his position to apply for and contract with the school to construct a house for his son for less than market value, in violation of CGS 1-84 (c).  In addition, Respondent falsely stated on the application that the construction was not on behalf of an immediate family member.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1500 to the State Ethics Commission. 

Docket No. 1998-16 In the Matter of a Complaint against Patricia Jackson.  On February 5, 1999, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was the Affirmative Action and Contract Compliance Supervisor for the Connecticut Human Rights and Opportunities (“CHRO”), she engaged in paid private consulting work for a company subject to the jurisdiction of CHRO, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b) and (c). Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000

Docket No. 1998-14 In The Matter of a Complaint against Gerry Egan. On April 12, 1999, The Commission and Respondent, the High Sheriff of New London County, entered into a Stipulation and Order. Under the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $4,000 for using his position to appoint his wife and son to jobs with the New London County Sheriff’s Office.

Docket No. 1998-12 In The Matter of a Complaint against Thomas G. Cotter. On February 1, 1999, the Commission and Respondent, a former Workers’ Compensation Commissioner, entered into a Stipulation and Order. Under the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,000 for accepting payments from a law firm which had a substantial Workers’ Compensation practice while he was serving as a Workers’ Compensation Commissioner.

Docket No. 1998-11 In the Matter of a Complaint against Gerald C. Werner.  On October 2, 1998 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Consent Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a professor at Southern Connecticut State University, entered into a contract with the Connecticut State University System without following an open an public bid process, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (i).   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $2000, with $1000 of the penalty suspended in recognition of the University’s failure to also adhere to the requirements of CGS § 1-84 (i). 

Docket No. 1998-10  In the Matter of a Complaint against Andrew De Rocco.   On August 24, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while serving as the Commissioner of Higher Education, accepted at least $3,500 in honoraria in his official capacity over the course of two years, in violation of CGS sections 1-84 (c) and (k).   The Complaint further alleged that Respondent failed to disclose the honoraria on his annual Statement of Financial Interests, in violation of CGS § 1-83 (b)(1)(B).   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations were unintentional.  Respondent was directed to return the honoraria to their source, and to pay a civil penalty of $1,000. 

Docket No. 1998-9  In the Matter of a Complaint against Ana-Maria Garcia.   On November 6, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while a member of the State Board of Trustee, was selected by the Board of Trustee to be the Chief Administrative Officer for the Hartford school system without an open and public process in violation of CGS § 1-84 (i).  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent failed to make disclosures of two debts over $10,000 on her Statement of Financial Interests (“SFI”) for the years 1996 and 1997, thereby violating CGS § 1-83 (b)(1).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations relating to Respondent’s acceptance of her position with the Hartford school system were unintentional and declined to fine her in recognition that Respondent resigned as the Chief Administrative Officer shortly after accepting the position.  The Commission dismissed the allegations relating to the failure to disclose the debts in the SFI upon finding that Respondent had a good faith belief that the debts did not exceed the reporting threshold of $10,000. 

Docket No. 1998-8 In the Matter of a Complaint against Louis Martin.   On December 4, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was the Executive Director of the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (“CHRO”) he utilized state time, travel, personnel and/or other resources incident to the performance of human rights training for the consulting business known as “Albion Associates,” of which he was a principal, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent’s position at “Albion Associates” during his tenure as Executive Director of CHRO impaired his independence of judgment as to his official duties, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b).    Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $3,000.00.

Docket No. 1998-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against David Holmes.  On June 5, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Mr. Holmes, then an employee of the Department of Environmental Protection, used his state computer for personal business purpose, by modifying, printing and storing documents relating to a rental property he owned, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay $2000 to the Ethics Commission.  However, based on Respondent’s cooperation with the Commission, $1,000 of the fine was suspended provided that Respondent continued compliance with the Code of Ethics.

Docket No. 1998-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against John Eichler.  On June 5, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent left his state position at the Department of Environmental Protection and thereafter became employed by Time Action & Quality, Inc. (“TAQ”), as a consultant for TAQ’s client, The American Wire Company.  The Complaint further alleged that within a year after leaving state service, Mr. Eichler improperly appeared before his former agency on behalf of The American Wire company in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional, and Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $2,000. 

Docket No. 1998-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against A. Robert Zeff and Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc.  On May 27, 1998, the Commission and Respondents entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The four count Amended Complaint alleged that Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc., which also did business as Shoreline Star Greyhound Park and Entertainment Complex, and its president, A. Robert Zeff, were registered lobbyists regulated by, and with matters pending in front of, the Gaming Policy Board (the “Board”).   The Amended Complaint further alleged that Respondents gave gifts to the Chairman of the Board in violation of CGS sections 1-84 (m) and 1-97(a), and then failed to disclose such gifts on Respondents’ quarterly lobbyist disclosure reports as required by CGS § 1-96 (e).   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondents agreed to pay $15,000 to the State Ethics Commission as follows:

(1)   $2000 for giving gifts to the Chairman;

(2)   $7000 for the failure to report gifts in 1995;

(3)   $4000 for failure to report gifts in 1996; and

(4)   $2000 for failure to keep substantiating records in 1997. 

Respondents were also ordered to establish a record-keeping system for tracking expenditures to public officials. 

Docket No.  1998-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against William R. Darcy.  On April 22, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  Respondent was an employee of the Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority (“CRRA”), a quasi-public agency.  The Complaint alleged that on or about November 15, 1997, while Respondent was employed by CRRA, he participated substantially in the negotiation of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) between CRRA and American Ash Recycling Corporation, whose parent company was Environmental Capital Holdings Inc. (“ECH”) for the design, construction, and operation of an ash recycling project.   Respondent thereafter resigned as an employee of CRRA, and began employment with ECH within one year of negotiating the MOU, in violation of CGS § 1-84b (d).   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the matter was one of first impression for the Commission and thus, it determined that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1000.

Docket No. 1998-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Francis J. Muska, Jr.  On January 9, 1998, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.   Respondent was the Chairman of the Gaming Policy Board (the “Board”).  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was serving as the Chairman of the Board, he received benefits from Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc., a registered lobbyist, and/or its President, A. Robert Zeff.   At the time, Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc. and Zeff had matters pending before, and/or were regulated by the Board.   Under the settlement, the Commission found that Respondent accepted benefits in ground transportation, lodging, and meals worth over $50 from A. Robert Zeff and/or Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc., and that the acceptance of such benefits was a violation of CGS sections 1-84 (j), (m) and (c).   Under the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay $500 to charity to reimburse for the value of the benefits he had received, and to pay a $2000 civil penalty.

Docket No. 1997-11 In the Matter of a Complaint against Rae Thiesfield.  On November 24, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent left her state position as a staff attorney for the Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities (“CHRO”) and thereafter, began employment as an attorney with the firm Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C.   The Complaint further alleged that Respondent, in her capacity as an attorney for Updike, Kelly & Spellacy, P.C., improperly appeared and represented clients before CHRO prior to the expiration of the one year period after she left state service, in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $6,000 and to comply with the post-state employment requirements of the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  

Docket No. 1997-7 In the Matter of a Complaint against Anthony D. Camilliere.  On May 2, 1997 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in two occasions in 1995, while Respondent was the Executive Assistant and Director of Field Services for the Senate Majority Caucus, he received gifts of tickets to events at the Meadows Music Theater from a registered lobbyist and/or its representative, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (j).   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent agreed to pay $500 to charity in reimbursement of the value of the tickets he received, and to pay a civil penalty of $250.

Docket No. 1997-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Lewis B. Rome.  On June 6, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.   The Complaint alleged that in 1995 and in 1996, while Respondent was the Chairperson of the University of Connecticut Board of Trustees and the Vice-Chairperson of the Connecticut Convention Center Authority, he obtained gifts of 19 complimentary tickets from the Meadows Music Theater and/or its representative James Sandler, both registered lobbyists, for use by Respondent’s family members, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (j).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent agreed to pay $625 to charity in reimbursement of the value of the concert tickets he received, and to pay a civil penalty of $750.

Docket No. 1997-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Karl Witwicki.  On April 4, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was employed by the Department of Revenue Services as a Revenue Examiner I, he accepted payment from H & R Block, a private tax preparation service, for the preparation of state and federal tax returns on behalf of H & R Block clients.  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent’s actions constituted acceptance of outside employment which impaired his independence of judgment as to his official duties, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.

Docket No. 1997-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Norma A. Younadim.   On July 11, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The two-count Complaint alleged that throughout 1994, 1995 and 1996, while Respondent was a Court Services Clerk for the New Britain Superior Court, she utilized her public office or position for personal financial gain by soliciting money and low-interest loans from attorneys appearing before the court, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).   The Complaint further alleged that Respondent’s conduct also violated CGS 1-84 (m).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay to the Commission a civil penalty of $5,000. 

Docket No. 1997-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Members of the Office of the Governor.  On April 3, 1997, the Commission and Respondents entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1995 and 1996 Respondents, Sam Caligiuri, Mary Ann Hanley and spouse, Kathy Mengacci and spouse, Joseph Nesteriak, David W. O’Leary and spouse, Kyra Pishtey and John Rowland and spouse, while serving as public officials and/or state employees, received over $50.00 in seating tickets at the Meadows Music Theater from registered lobbyists James Sandler and Meadows Music Theater in violation of CGS § 1-84 (m).  The Complaint further alleged that on more than one occasion, Respondents paid for the tickets, but paid less than the fair market value for them, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (j).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations were unintentional.  Respondents agreed to pay $3,841 to charity to reimburse for the value of the seating tickets they received.  Respondent Governor John G. Rowland, on behalf of himself and the other Respondents, agreed to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $2,000. 

Docket No. 1997-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against James P. Sandler.  On March 10, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The three-count Complaint alleged that in 1995 and 1996, Respondent, a registered lobbyist for the client registrant Meadows Music Theater (“Meadows”), provided gifts in excess of the $50 limit to state employees, public officials, and/or members of their staff or immediate family in violation to General Status § 1-97(a); that Respondent failed to keep proper records regarding the distribution of gifts for the benefit of a public officials, violating General Statues § 1-96 (a); and, that Respondent failed to report gifts distributed to reportable individuals gratis or without full payment, in violation of CGS § 1-96 (b).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a $100,000 civil penalty.  Respondent also agreed to allow the Commission staff to review, without prior notice, any and all records relevant to lobbying activity and/or activities in furtherance of lobbying, for a period of three years from the date of the acceptance of the Stipulation and Order by the Commission.

Docket No. 1997-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Meadows Music Theater.  On March 10, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The four-count Complaint alleged that in 1995 and 1996 Respondent, a registered lobbyist, provided approximately $100,000 in gifts of food, drinks and concert tickets to state employees, public officials, their staff and immediate family members, and failed to file financial reports that accurately reported the gifts, in violation of CGS § 1-96.  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent failed to keep proper records regarding the distribution of complimentary concert tickets, thereby failing to maintain the documents necessary to substantiate its expenditures for the benefit of public officials, in violation of CGS § 1-96a.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a $150,000 civil penalty.  Respondent also agreed to allow the Commission staff to review any and all records relevant to lobbying activity and/or activities in furtherance of lobbying, without prior notice, for a period of three years from the date of the Stipulation and Order.

Docket No. 1996-7  In the Matter of a Complaint against Jewel Productions, LTD.  On May 2, 2007, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1995 Respondent, a registered lobbyist and an organization which ran the Volvo Tennis Tournament, provided gifts in excess of the $50.00 limit to various state employees and public officials in violation of CGS § 1-97(a); that Respondent failed to report expenditures of over $10.00 dollars for the benefit of a public official in violation of CGS § 1-96 (e); and, that Respondent failed to keep proper records regarding the distribution of gifts for the benefit of a public officials, violating CGS § 1-96 (a).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations were unintentional and that Respondent’s conduct was merely negligent.  Respondent agreed to pay a $3,000 civil penalty.  Respondent also agreed to allow the Commission to review any and all records relevant to lobbying activity for a period of three years from the date of the Stipulation and Order.      

Docket No:  1996-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Dean E. McLear.  On May 2, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was a manager at the Department of Transportation, he received gifts totaling $105 from a registered lobbyist, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (“3-M”), in violation of CGS sections 1-84 (m) and (j).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a $500 civil penalty and to comply with the requirements of the state Code of Ethics for Public Officials.    

Docket No. 1996-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against James F. Sullivan.  On March 7, 1997, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1995 Respondent, while serving as the Bureau Chief, Bureau of Engineering and Highway Operations of the Connecticut Department of Transportation, received gifts over $50.00 in the form of golf greens fees and baseball tickets from a registered lobbyist, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (“3-M”) in violation of CGS sections 1-84 (j) and (m).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $500 and to comply with the requirements of state Code of Ethics for Public Officials.    

Docket No. 1996-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (“3-M”).  On May 2, 1997, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1995 Respondent, a registered lobbyist, provided gifts in excess of the $50.00 annual limit to two state employees in violation of CGS § 1-97.  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent failed to report expenditures over $10.00 for the benefit of a public official or his/her staff member in violation of CGS § 1-96 (e).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $8,000.  Respondent also agreed to establish procedures to safeguard against any recurrence of these violations, including ongoing ethics trainings and the establishment of a tracking system for the reporting of expenditures for the benefit of Connecticut state employees and public officials.    

Docket No. 1995-9 In the Matter of a Complaint against Suzanne West.  On July 12, 1996 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that while Respondent was a Real Estate Investment Officer for the Office of the Treasurer, she participated substantially in the negotiation or award of a July 1, 1994 state contract to The O’Connor Group, an investment advisory firm.  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent’s state employment was terminated by lay-off and, within a year of leaving state service, Respondent accepted employment with The O’Connor Group in violation of CGS § 1-84b (d).  Under the terms of the settlement Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1000.  In settling the matter, the SEC accepted Respondent’s explanation that she did not understand that the revolving door prohibition extended to those who were laid off from state service.

Docket No. 1995-7 In the Matter of a Complaint against Marianne Smith.  On July 10, 1995, the Ethics Commission entered a Notice of Termination of Preliminary Investigation and Results and found that this Compliant was precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.   The Complaint was filed by John Merchant, who was Respondent in Ethics Commission Docket No. 1994-2.  Previously, on October 7, 1994 and February 3, 1995, the Commission had considered the allegations that formed the subject of the complaint (in the context of a motion to disqualify SEC staff from prosecuting the complaint against Merchant) and had already found the allegations to be without merit.    

Docket No. 1995-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Alan S. Plofsky.  On July 16, 1995, the Ethics Commission entered a Notice of Termination of Preliminary Investigation and Results and found that this Complaint was precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel.   The Complaint was filed by John Merchant, who was Respondent in Ethics Commission Docket No. 1994-2.  Previously, on October 7, 1994, the Commission had considered the allegations that formed the subject of the complaint (in the context of a motion to disqualify SEC staff from prosecuting the complaint against Merchant) and had already found the allegations to be without merit.    

Docket No. 1995-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Orville C. Karan.  On May 5, 1995, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The two-count Complaint alleged that Respondent was the Director of the A.J. Pappanikou Center on Special Education and Rehabilitation, a University Affiliated Program (“UAP”) of the University of Connecticut.  That Respondent, in his state role, transferred state funds generated by a program run by UPA, into the checking account of a private corporation for which Respondent was the Director and Vice-President, in violation of CGS sections 1-85.   The Complaint further alleged that Respondent failed to disclose the conflict of interest in violation of CGS § 1-86 (a).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay to the Commission a civil penalty of $1000 and to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics.     

Docket No. 1995-2 In The Matter of a Complaint against A. Searle Field.  On July 21, 1995, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent left his state position as Chief of Staff to Governor Lowell P. Weicker and, within a year of leaving state service, represented his new employer for compensation before his former agency in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent represented his new employer in a particular matter in which he participated personally and substantially while in state service in violation of CGS 1-84b (a).  Under the terms of the settlement the Commission found that Respondent was exceedingly negligent in violating § 1-84b (b).  The Commission dismissed the second violation of § 1-84b (a) based on staff investigation that indicated that Respondent’s involvement was not substantial.  Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1000.

Docket No. 1994-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (“3-M”).  On July 7, 1995, the Commission and 3-M entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The five-count Amended Complaint alleged that in 1992, Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-96 (a) by failing to register as a client lobbyist, although it made expenditures for lobbying and in furtherance of lobbying in excess of $1,000, and by failing to file the required monthly and quarterly reports; that in 1992, 1993 and 1994, Respondent failed to report various expenditures for over ten dollars or more for the benefit of a public official and or a member of his or her staff, in violation of § 1-96 (e); and that Respondent failed to report the fundamental terms of contract and the terms of compensation for lobbying and in furtherance of lobbying, in violation of CGS § 1-96 (e) and Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies § 1-92-48 (e).   Under the terms of the Settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $20,000 and to file all financial reports, amended final reports and/or other documents required by the Commission.    

Docket No. 1994-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against William Halstead.  On November 8, 1994, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Commission found that Respondent impaired his independence of judgment with regard to his state job in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b).  The Complaint alleged that, while a state employee serving as fire chief for Fairfield Hills Hospital, Respondent prepared a bid specification for the Hospital to use in purchasing a fire truck.  At the time Respondent drafted the bid specification, he was also privately employed by one of the companies bidding for the contract, and Respondent used information from his private employment to draft the bid specification in favor of his private employer.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered, and Respondent agreed, to pay a civil penalty of $500 and to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics.    

Docket No. 1994-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Peter Waldron.  On September 27, 1994, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.   Among other things, the Complaint alleged that Respondent, while serving as Assistant Executive Director of the Legislative Management Committee, stored personal belongings in a state storage facility for 38 months, and did not reimburse the state for the use of the space.  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent received snow plowing and landscaping services on one or more occasions from contractors doing business with the State, for which Respondent was either not billed or payment was delayed.  Respondent’s actions constituted a use of his state office and position for personal financial gain in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $2,000.   

Docket No. 1994-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against John F. Merchant.  Following a public hearing, the Commission found that Respondent, while serving as the Consumer Counsel for the State of Connecticut, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by claiming state work time when, in fact, he was actually attending various golf tournaments in his capacity as an official for the United States Golf Association. The Commission ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 and to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  Respondent appealed the Commission’s findings to the Superior Court, which dismissed the appeal.  John F. Merchant v. State Ethics Commission, CV96-0330176 (J.D., Fairfield, September 24, 1997).  The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the Superior Court’s dismissal.  John F. Merchant v. State Ethics Commission, 53 App. 808 (1999).

Docket No. 1994-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against William M. Simmons.  On June 23, 1994, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.   The three-count Complaint alleged that in 1991 and 1992 Respondent, while employed at H.H. Ellis Vocational-Technical School as the head of its aviation maintenance department, impaired his independence of judgment in violation of CGS § 1-84 (b).  Specifically, Respondent, doing business as New England Aero Services, Inc., sold airplane parts to individuals who were also customers of the school, determined the types of work to be performed for those costumers at the school by its students, and determined the amount of moneys to be charged to these costumers for the work performed.  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent used his state position for financial gain when he placed a private company on the list of vendors approved by the school and then sold airplane parts to that company for resale to customers of the school in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $3,000 and to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics.     

Docket No. 1993-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against William Sawicki.  On July 29, 1994, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while he was a sanitarian in the Department of Health Services’ Environmental Health Section violated CGS §§ 1-84 (b) and 1-84 (c) by accepting outside employment that impaired his independence of judgment, and by using his office or position to obtain financial gain.  Respondent was alleged to have steered work to an outside business in which he had a financial interest.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.      

Docket No. 1993-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Edward C. Krawiecki, Jr.  On July 12, 1993, the Commission and Respondent, Representative Edward C. Krawiecki, Jr., entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent used his state position or office in violation of CGS §§ 1-85 and 1-84 (c) by attempting to enact legislation that would benefit his private business.  Respondent, although not admitting the violation, acknowledged that there was sufficient evidence for an impartial trier of fact to find a violation.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,500.   

Docket No. 1993-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against The Banks Association of Connecticut.  On July 16, 1993 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order, which noted Respondent’s unintentional violation of the Code of Ethics based on a misinterpretation of a change in the law.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1992, Respondent, a registered lobbyist, provided gifts in food and beverage to a public official in excess of the $150 limit in violation of CGS § 1-97(a).   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $500.    

Docket No. 1993-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Alfred J. Rioux.   Following a public hearing on January 17, 1996, the Commission issued a finding that Respondent, while serving as Hartford County High Sheriff, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by engaging in a fee-splitting arrangement with several of his deputies, charging fees not authorized by statute, and using his state employee staff to perform clerical duties associated with his own private service of process business.  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $7,000.  Respondent appealed the Commission’s finding to the Superior court, which dismissed the appeal.  Rioux v. State Ethics Commission, 45  Supp. 242.  The Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the Superior Court’s dismissal of the appeal.  Rioux v. State Ethics Commission, 48  App. 214 (1998).   

Docket No. 1992-17 In the Matter of a Complaint against Charles D. Ray.  On June 7, 1993, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, as the Director of the Moot Court Interterm Program at the  University of Connecticut, used his public office or position for financial gain when he hired his wife as one of the interterm moot court instructors, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c ).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional and ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of $500 and to henceforth comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics.    

Docket No. 1992-16 In the Matter of a Complaint against Cleveland Donald.  On July 12, 1993, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, as the Director of the Waterbury Regional Campus of the University of Connecticut, used his public office or position for financial gain when he took steps to hire his wife as Minority Recruiter at the Waterbury Campus at the rate of $6,000 for a one month period, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c ).  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent failed to disclose this information to his superiors in violation of CGS § 1-86 (a).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional and ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of $2,000 and to henceforth comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics.    Amended Complaint 92-16

Docket No. 1992-15 In the Matter of a Complaint against Janice P. Hills.  Following a probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, within a year of leaving her state position as the Deputy Executive Director and Director of Research and Development of the Commission on Hospitals and Health Care (“CHHC”), violated CGS § 1-84 b(b) by entering into a contract with Arthur D. Little, Inc., in regard to a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) issued by CHHC.  Specifically, the Complaint alleged that Arthur D. Little, Inc. submitted a response to the RFP which identified Respondent as a consultant and participant of the project, and referenced her previous affiliation with CHHC.  Respondent’s participation in the Arthur D. Little’s submission to CHHC less than a year after leaving state service constituted a violation of CGS 1-84b (b).  On March 1, 1993, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  Pursuant to the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $750 and to comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  

Docket No. 1992-14 In the Matter of a Complaint against John J. Farrell.  Following a probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, within a year of leaving his state position as a member of the Commission on Hospitals and Health Care (“CHHC”) violated CGS § 1-84 b(b) by entering into a contract with KPMG Peat Marwick in regard to a Request for Proposals published by CHHC.  Specifically, the Complaint alleged that the proposal from KPMG Peat Marwick identified Respondent as a subcontractor and technical advisor on the project, and referenced his previous affiliations with CHHC.  The Complaint also alleged that the  Respondent, while in state service, and less than one year prior to his resignation, participated substantially in the awarding of two contracts to KPMG Peat Marwick, in violation of CGS § 1-84 b(d).  Respondent appealed the Commission’s finding of probable cause to the Superior Court, requesting a reversal and stay of the Commission’s findings, and an Order requiring the Commission to keep confidential both its findings and the fact of the appeal.  Following the Superior Court’s dismissal of Farrell’s appeal (9  L. Rptr. 272, 273-74 (1993)), the Commission proceeded to a public hearing and, on March 25, 1994, Judge Trial Referee David Shea issued a Memorandum of Decision finding that Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-84 b(b) and 1-84 b(d).  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.    

Docket No. 1992-13 The State Ethics Commission received a request from Probate Court Judge James Lawlor to investigate State Representative Lynn Taborsak’s behavior in connection with the receipt of mileage reimbursement for official business while she was receiving unemployment benefits.  The Commission, at its meeting of September 14, 1992, found that the allegations in Judge Lawlor’s letter lacked a cause of action under the Code of Ethics.  The Commission also found that Judge Lawler may have abused Rep. Taborsak’s rights to confidentiality when he informed the press that he had asked the Commission for an investigation in this matter.  Representative Taborsak, subsequent to Judge Lawlor informing the press, waived her rights to confidentiality and the file was made public by the Commission.    

Docket No. 1992-12 In the Matter of a Complaint against Betty Baronowski.  On November 2, 1992, the State Ethics Commission (“SEC”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, within a year after leaving her state position at the Department of Administrative Services (“DAS”), improperly appeared before DAS on behalf of her new employer concerning a matter in which the State had a substantial interest, in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 and to comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.   

Docket No. 1992-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Demetrios Louziotis, Sr.  On April 6, 1992, the State Ethics Commission (“SEC”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while serving as the Executive Director of the State Division of Special Revenue, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by recommending and authorizing the hiring of his brother for employment with the State Division of Special Revenue.  The SEC found that the violation was not intentional.  Under the terms of the settlement, the SEC ordered and Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $500.   

Docket No. 1992-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Chris A. Gentile.  On August 3, 1992 The State Ethics Commission (“SEC”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while serving as the Director of the state Office of Emergency Medical Services (“OEMS”) violated CGS § 1-84 (b) by accepting outside employment that impaired his independence of judgment as to his official duties as state employee.  In particular, Respondent accepted employment with C.A.G. Associates, Inc., a private corporation organized by Respondent and the principals of Medstar, Inc., a company owner of several businesses regulated by OEMS.   The Complaint also alleged that within a year after leaving state service, Respondent appeared before his former agency representing his new employer in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).    Under the terms of the settlement, the SEC ordered and Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $2,000.   

Docket No. 1992-2 In the Matter of an Evaluation of Southern New England Telephone Company (“SNET”).  The Commission conducted an investigation in connection to a possible violation of CGS § 1-91, et seq., by SNET, a registered lobbyist.  The evaluation focused on whether SNET failed to report gifts and meals provided to Daniel Colarusso, former head of the Office of Information Technology.   During the course of the investigation, SNET’s records revealed that in 1990 and 1991, it failed to reports gifts and meals to Mr. Colarusso, benefits that should have been reported in SNET’s periodic lobbyist financial reports.  The investigation also revealed that the benefits were provided by two SNET’s former employees.   SNET filed amendment financial reports which reflect the uncovered information.   Upon the filing of the amended reports, no further action was taken by the SEC against SNET.  SNET waived its right to confidentiality of the file.

Docket No. 1992-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against John J. Lepore.  The Complaint alleged that subsequent to Respondent’s departure from state service, the SEC notified him within sixty days of his departure from state service of his responsibility to file an SFI covering the portion of the year for which he held his office or position.  The SEC received, after the sixty days provided by law, Respondent’s SFI containing only his name, the names of his spouse and dependent child and his state position.  Along with his Statement, the SEC received a statement from Respondent claiming that any other information requested by the form was protected by his rights and privileges against self-incrimination.  Following a preliminary confidential hearing, the State Ethics Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated CGS § 1-83 (a) by failing to file a completed SFI.    

Docket No.  1991-11 In the Matter of a Complaint against J. Edward Smith.  On August 3, 1991, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, as the Director of the University of the Third Age at Asnuntuck Community College, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by hiring his wife and daughter to teach courses at the University, by which they were compensated $2,200 and $562.50, respectively, and by assigning to himself the teaching of six courses by which he was compensated the amount of $2,062.50.  The Complaint further alleged that the courses created and assigned by Respondent enrolled a low amount of students or no students at all.  Respondent’s actions of the creation and assignment of these courses constituted the use of office or position to obtain financial gain for his spouse, his daughter and himself.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $5,000.    

Docket No.  1991-8 In the Matter of a Complaint against Theresa Bousquet.  On September 16, 1991, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, an employee for the Job Connection program administered by the Department of Income Maintenance, violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials when she intercepted a job request to recommend her son-in-law for a job.  Respondent’s son-in-law was not a participant of the program or eligible for a job through the program.  Respondent’s actions constituted a use of her public office or position to obtain financial gain for her husband’s child, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Under the terms of the agreement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $100.    

Docket No. 1991-7  In the Matter of a Complaint against Thomas Colapietro.  The Complaint, filed by state Representative Gene Migliaro, alleged that Respondent, a registered lobbyist for the United Auto Workers, violated provisions of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists by engaging in a “smear campaign” against him.  On April 1, 1991, the Commission dismissed the Complaint because it failed to state a cause of action under the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.  Respondent subsequently waived his rights to confidentiality under CGS § 1-93a (a), and the file was made public by the Commission.   

Docket No. 1991-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Joseph W. Winski.  On September 16, 1992, the Commission and Respondent, the Director of Emergency Response Services at the University of Connecticut (“UConn”), entered into Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in May 1990, UConn purchased an Emergency One Cyclone fire truck from Connecticut Apparatus Sales and Services.  Subsequent to the purchase, Mr. Earl Glenney, President of Connecticut Apparatus Sales and Services, knowing that UConn intended to purchase more equipment, provided Respondent with five round-trip airline tickets for travel for Respondent and his family to Orlando, Florida, and accommodations at a condominium owned by Mr. Gleeney. Respondent’s acceptance of these gifts constituted a use of public office or position in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 and to make a $1,000 contribution to a charity.   

Docket No. 1990-14 In the Matter of a Complaint against Nicholas Torneo.   On February 5, 1992, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  Following a confidential probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent, while serving as a Senior Mortgage Underwriter for the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority, accepted an airline ticket, accommodations and hunting fees paid by a person he knew or had reason to know was doing business or seeking to do business with his department or agency.  Respondent’s actions constituted a use of public office or position to obtain financial gain for himself in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.   

Docket No. 1990-13 In the Matter of a Complaint against Savings Banks’ Association of Connecticut.  On January 7, 1991, the Commission and Respondent, a registered lobbyist, entered into a Stipulation and Consent Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that between 1987 and 1990, Respondent provided gifts in excess of the $50 limit to legislators and other reportable individuals in violation of CGS § 1-97; that Respondent failed to report expenditures of fifteen dollars or more for the benefit of a public official; and, that Respondent failed to keep and/or altered the proper records substantiating these expenditures, in violation of CGS § 1-96.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of $25,000 and to allow the Commission to review, without prior notice, any and all records relevant to lobbying and/or to activities in furtherance of lobbying for a period of three years from the execution of the Stipulation and Order.   

Docket No. 1990-12 In the Matter of a Complaint against Brendan J. Kennedy.  On November 5, 1990, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Consent Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a registered lobbyist for Connecticut Retail Merchants Association (CRMA), violated CGS §§ 1-96 and 1-97 by providing gifts to public officials in excess of the $50 limit, and by failing to file financial reports that accurately reported the gifts.  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent violated CGS § 1-91 (g) by writing personal checks as political contribution, for which he was later reimbursed by CMRA.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $15,000, and to allow the Commission to review, without prior notice, any and all records relevant to lobbying and/or to activities in furtherance of lobbying for a period of three years from the execution of the Stipulation and Order.     

Docket No. 1990-8 In the Matter of a Complaint against George Gunther.  On January 7, 1991, the Commission and Respondent, a state Senator, entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1988, 1989 and 1990, Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (j) by accepting gifts from a registered lobbyist valued in excess of the gift limit.  Specifically, Respondent accepted liquor, beer, and soft drinks deliveries, in excess of $1,000.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to make a contribution of $1,000 to a charity approved by the Commission, and to pay a civil penalty of $2,000.     

Docket No. 1990-7 In the Matter of a Complaint against Nancy Owen.  On January 2, 1991, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Consent Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1989, Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (j) by accepting gifts from a registered lobbyist valued in excess of the gift limit.  Specifically, Respondent accepted airline tickets, accommodations for a trip to Monterey, California, and a chartered fishing trip.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to make a contribution of $850 to a charity approved by the commission, and to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.

Docket No. 1990-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Linda A. Kowalski.  On November 1, 1990, the Commission and Respondent, a registered lobbyist, entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The ten-count Complaint alleged that in 1987, 1988, 1989 and 1990, Respondent violated the gift limits and reporting and record-keeping provisions of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyist.  The Complaint included allegations that Respondent provided over $1,000 in alcohol and other gifts to a public official, and that she provided airfare and lodging worth over $750 to a legislative staff member in connection with a trip to Monterey, California in 1989.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that Respondent knowingly and intentionally violated the Code of Ethics.  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $50,000, and to allow the Commission to review, without prior notice, any and all records relevant to lobbying and/or to activities in furtherance of lobbying for a period of three years from the execution of the Stipulation and Order.    

Docket No. 1990-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Earnestine Kirkland.  On January 7, 1991, the Commission and Respondent, a professor and chairman of the Social Science Division at the South Central Community College (SCCC), entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent used her state office and position to obtain financial gain for her husband when, as chairman of the Social Sciences Division, she recommended her husband to teach a course at SCCC.   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $300 and to henceforth comply with the provisions of the Code of Ethics.     

Docket No. 1990-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Diana Duarte.  On January 7, 1991, the Commission and Respondent, a professor and chairman of the Business Division at the South Central Community College (SCCC), entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent used her state office and position to obtain financial gain for her husband when, as the chairman of the Business Division, she recommended her husband to teach a course at SCCC.   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $300 and to henceforth comply with the provisions of the Code of Ethics.      

Docket No. 1990-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Connecticut Retail Merchants Association (“CRMA”).  On October 1, 1990, the Commission and Respondent, a registered lobbyist, entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1987, 1988 and 1989, Respondent violated the gift limits and reporting and record-keeping provisions of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted that it had deliberately and intentionally violated the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists as alleged in the Amended Complaint.  Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $50,000, and to allow the Commission to review, without prior notice, any and all records relevant to lobbying for a period of three years from the execution of the Stipulation and Order.

Docket No. 1990-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against the American Association of University Professors – CSU.  The Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a registered lobbyist, violated CGS § 1-96 by (1) failing to report its fundamental terms of contract for the production of a brochure soliciting others to contact state legislators to request more funding for higher education, and (2), by failing to report its expenditures for such lobbying activities.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 and to comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.     

Docket No. 1990-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Frank Cannatelli. On May 15, 1990, the Commission entered a Notice of Termination of Preliminary Investigation and Results Thereof, and found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (b ).  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while a correction officer for the Department of Corrections, provided legal representation to inmates under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections, including representation in an action against the Department of Corrections.  By carrying out these activities, Respondent accepted outside employment which is in direct conflict with his state employment resulting in an impairment of his independence of judgment as of his official duties.   Under the terms of the settlement signed by the parties on July 9, 1990, the Commission ordered Respondent to (1) cease and desist from compensated representation of any inmates under the jurisdiction of the Department of Corrections while he is employed at this Department, (2) refrain from accepting or retaining any fee or other payment earned or received in connection with said representation, and to comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics.    

Docket No. 1989-10 In the Matter of a Complaint against Owen M. Hayden.  On September 11, 1989, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while the Chief Maintenance Employee at Somers Correctional Institution, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by using his state position to obtain financial gain when he referred his private business to a subcontractor performing work under his supervision.  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (b) by accepting outside employment that impaired his independence of judgment as of his official duties, and § 1-86, by failing to disclose this information to his immediate supervisor of the potential conflict between the performance of his official duties and his interest in the private business.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $500 and to comply with the requirements of CGS §§ 1-84 (b), (c), and 1-86.   

Docket No.  1989-9 In the Matter of a Complaint against Connecticut Soft Drink Association.  The Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a registered lobbyist, violated CGS § 1-96 by (1) failing to report its fundamental terms of contract with Sullivan and Leshane Public Relations, Inc. for the production and placement of radio advertisements regarding the proposed tax on soft drinks, and (2), by failing to report expenditures for solicitations and/or paid communications regarding the proposed tax on soft drinks.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,500 and to comply with the reporting requirements of the Code of Ethics.      

Docket No. 1989-8 In the Matter of a Complaint against George Greider.  On August 7, 1989, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (i), by entering into a personal service contract valued at $100 or more with the Department of Mental Retardation, where his wife was employed as the Executive Assistant to the Commissioner, without going through the open and public process.   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $100 and to comply with the Code of Ethics.    

Docket No. 1989-7 In the Matter of a Complaint against MCI Telecommunications Corporation.  On March 5, 1990, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1988 and 1989, Respondent, a registered lobbyist, violated CGS §§ 1-96 and 1-97 by providing gifts in excess of fifty dollars per person to public officials and state employees, in connection with two golf events, and failed to accurately report these expenses.  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent failed to maintain the necessary documents to substantiate the reported amounts on its financial reports, in violation of CGS 1-96 (a).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted to the violations and stated that it relied on its retained lobbying firm for advice on compliance with lobbying laws.  The Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty of $10,000, to file complete and accurate reports regarding the events in question, and to comply with the requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.       

Docket No. 1989-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Robert W. Plage.  On June 26, 1989, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that Respondent, as the Director of Administration and Property Management for the University of Connecticut, used information obtained through holding such office or position to obtain financial gain, in violation of CGS §§ 1-84 (c) and 1-86 (a).  Specifically, the Complaint alleged that Respondent used information about a property offered for sale to the University of Connecticut which resulted in his financial advantage.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to make a charitable payment of $2000 to the UConn Children’s Cancer Fund.  The Commission imposed no penalty but ordered Respondent to henceforth comply with the requirements of §§ 1-84 (c) and 1-86 (a) of the Code of Ethics.       

Docket No. 1989-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Jennifer Peplinski Stevens.  On June 5, 1989, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent left her state position at the Department of Environmental Protection and thereafter became employed by The Stanley Works Company (“Company”).  The Complaint further alleged that within a year after leaving state service, Respondent improperly appear before her former agency on behalf of the Company in violation of CGS § 1-84b (b).  The Complaint also alleged that Respondent represented the Company in a matter in which she participated personally and substantially while in state service, in violation of CGS § 1-84b (a).   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted to unknowingly violating the Code of Ethics.  The Commission ordered, and Respondent agreed, to cease and desist from representing, for one year since she left state service, any private employer before her former agency; to cease and desist from representing the Company with respect to the matter she personally and substantially participated while in state service; and to pay a civil penalty of $1,000.

Docket No. 1989-4 In The Matter of a Complaint against Faithful and True Roman Catholics.  On April 24, 1989, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order. The Complaint alleged that in 1988 and 1989, Respondent engaged in lobbying activities without registering with the Commission, in violation of CGS §§1-94 and 1-95.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted to the violations.  The Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to register as a lobbyist for the years 1988 and 1989, to file the client lobbyist financial reports required by § 1-96, and to pay a civil penalty of $200.

Docket No. 1989-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against Vito Mazza, Jr.  Following a probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent, a state Representative, violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  The Amended Complaint alleged that Respondent, while an employee of Northeast Bancorp, Inc./Union Trust, participated in the Employees’ Savings and Profit Sharing Plan, and had a financial interest in his employer’s common stocks.  The complaint further alleged that Respondent used his state position as a state representative by speaking and voting in favor of legislation that, if enacted, would have affected and changed Connecticut’s banking laws to benefit his financial interests.  Respondent’s conduct constituted a substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties, in violation of §§ 1-84 (a) and 1-85.  On August 14, 1989, following the finding of probable cause, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to refrain from speaking on or voting for any legislation in which Respondent had a direct conflict of interests, and to pay a civil penalty of $750 to the Council on Governmental Ethics Laws.

Docket No. 1988-14 In the Matter of a Complaint against Senator Cornelius O’Leary.  On December 13, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  As alleged in the Complaint, Respondent, a member of the General Assembly, violated CGS § 1-83 (b)(2) when he failed to disclose within thirty days fees or honoraria he received from a registered lobbyist.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional and that statement, filed by Respondent before the execution of the Stipulation and Order complied with § 1-83 (b)(2).  The Commission imposed no penalty.    

Docket No. 1988-13 In the Matter of a Complaint against Senator Reginald Smith.  On December 13, 1988, the Commission and Respondent, a member of the General Assembly, entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Commission found that Respondent violated CGS § 1-83 (b)(2) by failing to timely file a disclosure statement with the Commission regarding the receipt of a fee or honorarium from a registered lobbyist as alleged in the Complaint.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional and that the required statement, filed by Respondent prior to the execution of the Stipulation and Order, complied with § 1-83 (b)(2).  The Commission imposed no penalty.      

Docket No. 1988-12 In the Matter of a Complaint against Senator Thomas F. Upson.  On December 13, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  As alleged in the Complaint, Respondent, a member of the General Assembly, violated CGS § 1-83 (b)(2) when he failed to disclose within thirty days fees or honoraria he received from a registered lobbyist.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional and that statement, filed by Respondent before the execution of the Stipulation and Order complied with § 1-83 (b)(2).  The Commission imposed no penalty. 

Docket No. 1988-11 In the Matter of a Complaint against Pfizer, Inc.  On December 13, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a registered lobbyist, violated CGS § 1-96 (b) by failing to report expenditures for the benefit of an itemizable person on its periodic financial reports.  Under terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was unintentional.  Respondent was ordered to amend its client lobbyist financial reports to disclose any previously unreported fees, honoraria or expenses incurred in lieu of honoraria paid during the past three years, to pay a civil penalty of $1,000, and to comply with the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.    

Docket No. 1988-10 In the Matter of a Complaint against Elba Pagano.  On December 13, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation.  The Amended Complaint alleged that between 1986 and 1988, Respondent, as the Chief Court Interpreter, used her state position for financial gain for her spouse and/or business with which she was associated, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  More particularly, the complaint alleged that Respondent had employees of the Chief Court Interpreter’s Office refer individuals needing interpreting services which the State would not provide to Interpreters and Translators, Inc., her husband’s business.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 and to comply with the Code of Ethics.   

Docket No. 1988-9  In the Matter of a Complaint against W. Lee Palmer.  On June 6, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.   The Complaint alleged that in 1987, while Respondent was the Director of Leasing and Property Transfer of the Department of Public Works, he either participated substantially in or supervised the negotiation or award of a state contract with Hartford Square Associates.  The complaint further alleged that Respondent, within a year of the signing of that contract, began employment with Hartford Square North Associates Limited Partnership, in violation of CGS § 1-84b (d). The Complaint also alleged that, prior to departing state service, Respondent used his public office to obtain financial gain when he sent the Insurance Commissioner to inspect office space at  Hartford Square North in order to enhance employment prospects with Hartford Square, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c). Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted he violated CGS § 1-84b (d) and agreed to pay a civil penalty of $1,000, to terminate his consulting agreement with Hartford Square North Associates Limited Partnership, and to comply with the requirements of § 1-84b.  The Commission dismissed the allegations relating to § 1-84b (c) for lack of sufficient evidence.     

Docket No. 1988-8 In the Matter of a Complaint against John Farrell.  On July 11, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent violated CGS §1-96 by failing to report expenditures for administrative lobbying on the client’s third and fourth quarter lobbyist reports for 1987.   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that Respondent’s violation was not intentional, knowingly or willful.  Respondent was ordered to file amended communicator lobbyist financial reports for the corresponding periods, to pay a civil penalty of $750, and to comply with the reporting requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.     

Docket No. 1988-7 In the Matter of a Complaint against Wallace Lohr.  On July 11, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent violated CGS §1-96 by failing to report expenditures for administrative lobbying on the client’s third and fourth quarter lobbyist reports for 1987.   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that Respondent’s violation was not intentional, knowingly or willful.  Respondent was ordered to file amended communicator lobbyist financial reports for the corresponding periods, to pay a civil penalty of $2,000, and to comply with the reporting requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.

Docket No. 1988-6 In the Matter of a Complaint against Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Connecticut, Inc.  On July 11, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that in 1987 Respondent, a registered lobbyist, provided gifts in excess of the $50 limit to public officials and their immediate families in violation of CGS § 1-97(a).  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent failed to fully report these gifts on its third and fourth quarter lobbying reports for 1987, in violation of CGS §1-96. Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered and Respondent agreed to file amended lobbyist financial reports and to pay a civil penalty of $7,000.     

Docket No. 1988-5 In the Matter of a Complaint against Donald Berkowitz.  On June 6, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-95 by engaging in lobbyists activities on behalf of the Connecticut Hospital Association (“CHA”) without registering as a lobbyist.   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered Respondent to register as a lobbyist on behalf of CHA, to file the required communicator lobbyist financial reports, to pay a civil penalty of $500, and to comply with the registration requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.      

Docket No. 1988-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Connecticut Hospital Association.  On June 6, 1988, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent, a registered lobbyist, failed to report any of its expenditures for administrative lobbying as well as  activities in furtherance of legislative lobbying, in violation of General Statues § 1-96.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent admitted to the violation. The Commission ordered Respondent to file amended lobbyist financial reports, to pay a civil penalty of $4,000 and to comply with the reporting requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.

Docket No. 1988-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against Stephen Frayne.  On June 6, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-95 by engaging in lobbyists activities on behalf of the Connecticut Hospital Association (“CHA”) without registering as a lobbyist.   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered Respondent to register as a lobbyist on behalf of CHA, to file the required communicator lobbyist financial reports, to pay a civil penalty of $500, and to comply with the registration requirements of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.     

Docket No. 1987-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Robert B. Cohen.  On June 6, 1988, the Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that in 1987, Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-95, by engaging in lobbyists activities on behalf of Celavon Corporation (“Celavon”) without registering as a lobbyist for Celavon with the Commission.   Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission ordered Respondent to register on behalf of Celavon, to file the required communicator lobbyist financial reports, and to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists.     

Docket No. 1987-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Mary Beth Campbell.   On November 24, 1987, the Commission entered a Notice of Termination of Preliminary Investigation and Results Thereof and found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-84 (a), (b) and (c).  The Complaint alleged that in 1984 and 1985, the  Respondent, while a supervisor in the Vital Records Division of the Connecticut Department of Health Services researched information concerning vital records, which she had access to by reason of her official duties and state position, and sold it to a private company for financial gain.  By carrying out these activities, Respondent accepted outside employment which impaired her independence of judgment as to her official duties and used her public position to obtain financial gain for herself.  Following the Commission’s finding of probable cause, the Department of Health Services suspended Respondent from her job for three weeks without pay.  In light of Respondent’s suspension by her employer, under the terms of the Stipulation signed by the parties on September 19, 1988, the Commission imposed no further penalties, but ordered that Respondent to henceforth comply with the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.    

Docket No. 1987-2 In the matter of a Complaint against Milton Levine.  On June 2, 1987, the State Ethics Commission entered a Notice of Termination of Preliminary Investigation and Results and found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent  failed to disclose on his Statement of Financial Interests for the years 1984 and 1985, the name of a company with which he was associated, thereby violating CGS §§1-83 (a) and 1-83 (b)(1)(A).  The Commission found that Respondent’s violations were not to conceal the association but poor judgment in failing to seek legal advice as to how to file an accurate form.  The Commission ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of $100 for each violation, for a total of $200.      

Docket No. 1986-4 In the Matter of a Complaint against Peter F. Burns.  On December 15, 1986, the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent, while the Deputy Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Economic Development (“Department”), violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by using his public office and state position to obtain financial gain for himself.  Specifically, Respondent conducted business with entities that had benefited from the aid and assistance of the Department and with which the Department had an on-going relationship when he traded in his vehicle and bought a used vehicle through a program designated and operated to offer discounts on new and company used cars to certain groups of individuals.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations were unintentional.  In view of Respondent’s full cooperation in the matter, his previous suspension by the Governor relative to this incident, and his charitable payment equal to the amount of improper financial gain received with respect to the transactions in issue, the Commission imposed no penalties.   

Docket No. 1986-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Meredith Savage.  On March 24, 1987, the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Amended Complaint alleged that Respondent, a Nursing Home Ombudsman in the Department on Aging, entered into an agreement with the State Conservator to purchase the vehicle of a client, whose case she had worked on in her official capacity, with the intent to restore and resell it.  Respondent’s actions violated CGS § 1-84 (b), by accepting outside employment which impaired her independence of judgment as of her official duties; § 1-84 (c) by using her public office or position, or confidential information received through holding such office of position to obtain financial gain; and § 1-84 (i), by entering into a contract with the State, valued at one hundred dollars or more, without an open and public process.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $2,000 with $1,000 suspended in recognition of Respondent’s cooperation in settling the matter.    

Docket No. 1986-2 In the Matter of a Complaint against Cigna Corporation.  On November 3, 1986, the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The Complaint alleged that on June 21, 1986, Respondent, a registered lobbyist, violated CGS § 1-97(a) seventeen times by providing gifts in food and beverage in excess of the $49.99 per person limit to nine public officials and eight spouses.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that Respondent’s violations were technical and not intentional or willful.  Respondent was ordered to pay a civil penalty of $50 for each violation for a total penalty of $850.

Docket No. 1986-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Richard Nicoll.  Following a probable cause hearing, the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) found that there was probable cause to believe that Respondent violated CGS §§ 1-84, 1-85, and 1-86.   The Complaint alleged that Respondent, a State Worker’s Compensation Administrator, engaged in activities that resulted in a substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his duties and responsibilities.  Specifically, Respondent failed to recuse himself from taking official action on his own worker’s compensation claim which resulted in his financial advantage.  Pursuant to General Status §1-88 (d), after failed negotiations to settled the matter, the Commission referred the matter to the Office of the Attorney General for further disposition in accordance with CGS § 1-89 (c).      

Docket No. 1985-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Eugene A. Migliaro, Jr.  The State Ethics Commission and Respondent, a State Representative, entered into a Stipulation and Order.  On September 26, 1985, the Commission found that there was probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials by failing to file an accurate Statement of Financial Interests (“SFI”) for the calendar years 1982 and 1983.  The Complaint alleged that Respondent failed to disclose receipt of income in excess of one thousand dollars from “legalized gaming” in 1982 and 1983 in violation of CGS § 1-83 (b)(1)(B).  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violations were not intentional or willful, but that Representative Migliaro had been “negligent in observing the relevant requirements of the Code of Ethics.”  The Commission did not impose a civil penalty, but ordered Respondent to amend his Statements of Financial Interests accordingly and to comply with the requirements of General Status § 1-83.     

Docket No. 1985-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Douglas Hanahan.  Following a probable cause hearing in which the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) found there was probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code, the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  At the probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that from approximately May 1, 1982, until approximately January 21, 1985, Respondent, a State Police Lieutenant, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by using his state position for his own financial gain.  Specifically, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent used his access to state police investigative files – files which were not available to the public – to author a book.  In addition, Respondent marketed the book by touting his access to such non-public files, and his use of detailed and explicit information that he had gained from such access, in authoring the book.  However, in settling the matter, the Commission found that Respondent’s violation was not intentional or willful.   Respondent admitted that his conduct violated the Code, but that he used no confidential information and that the book contained only fictionalized composites of crimes.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission, in lieu of any other action it was authorized to take, ordered Respondent to comply with the requirements of § 1-84 (c) of CGS and imposed no penalties.  The Commission also stated that Respondent could not use his state position in promoting the book, but could identify himself as a state police lieutenant.    

Docket No. 1984-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Abraham Giles.  On April 6, 1984, the State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Respondent, a state representative, entered into a Stipulation and Order.   On its meeting of March 7, 1984, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials by using his state position for financial gain.  The Complaint alleged that on February 17, 1984, Respondent violated CGS § 1-84 (c) when he produced and mailed letters on his official stationery and bearing his official title and position to solicit business for a business with which he was associated.  Under the terms of the settlement, the Commission found that the violation was not intentional and ordered Respondent to pay a civil penalty of fifty dollars.

Docket No. 1982-3 In the Matter of a Complaint against Everett O’Keefe.  On May 6, 1983 the State Ethics Commission and Respondent, a Superintendent of a state hospital and a State Retirement Commissioner, entered into a Stipulation and Order. Following a confidential probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent violated the Code of Ethics for Public Officials as alleged in the Complaint.  The Complaint alleged that, after being appointed as a State Retirement Commissioner, Respondent presented the Retirement Commission with a request to purchase retirement credit – a request that had been denied by the Retirement Commission on two occasions prior to Respondent’s appointment to the Commission.  The Complaint further alleged that Respondent participated in the Retirement Commission meeting that resulted in the approval of his application for purchase of early retirement.  Under the Stipulation and Order, Respondent admitted that “in hindsight,” his conduct violated CGS § 1-84 (c), prohibiting the use of office for financial gain.  The Commission found that these violations were not intentional.   Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent agreed to ask the Retirement Commission reconsider his application for retirement credit.  No civil penalty was imposed.    

Docket No. 1982-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against Connecticut Yankee Greyhound, Inc.  On April 22, 1982, the State Ethics Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  On April 14, 1982, following a probable cause hearing, the Commission found probable cause to believe that Respondent, a registered lobbyist, committed fifty-six violations of the Code of Ethics for Lobbyists:  (a)  sixteen gifts of over $25 to public officials or their spouses, in violation of CGS § 1-97(a); and (b)  forty incidents of the  Respondent’s failure to disclose an expenditure for the benefit of a public official, in violation of CGS § 1-96 (b).  The Commission found that these violations were not intentional but that Respondent and its officer had been “extremely negligent.”  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent was ordered by the Commission to revise its financial reports concerning its lobbying activities and to pay a civil penalty of $11,000.     

Docket No. 1980-1 In the Matter of a Complaint against James S. Peters II.  On October 1, 1980 the former State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order.  The  Commission determined that there was probable cause to believe that in 1978 Respondent, the Associated Commissioner in the State Department of Education, violated CGS § 1-84 (c) by participating in the award of a grant for the benefit of Camp Bennett, an asset which was owned by a business with which he was associated.  The Commission also determined that there was probable cause to believe that Respondent violated CGS § 1-86, which required that he disclose the conflict of interest to his immediate supervisor prior to taking any official action on the grant  request.  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent stated that he was unaware of the requirements of § 1-86.  Nevertheless, the Commission found that Respondent showed “unusually poor judgment.”  The Commission imposed a civil penalty of $750.

Docket No. 1979-12 In the Matter of Representative Paul A. LaRosa.   The Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order in resolution of a Complaint filed by a member of the public.  In the Complaint, it was alleged that Representative LaRosa used his official state representative stationery, bearing indicia of his office as a State Representative, to send out letters to lobbyists and public officials notifying them of the opening of Casa Loma Restaurant, a business with which Representative LaRosa was associated, in violation of CGS § 1-84 (c).  Both Representative LaRosa and his son Anthony LaRosa, holders of proprietary interests in the restaurant business, signed the letters. In the Stipulation and Order, the Commission found that the violation was not willful or intentional.  Respondent agreed to reimburse the cost of the mailings and to pay a civil penalty of $250.  Representative LaRosa further agreed to comply in future with the provisions of CGS § 1-84 (c).   

Docket No. 1979-4 In the Matter of The American Can Company.   On May 10, 1979 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order, resolving the Complaint in this matter. In an April 1979 Complaint filed by a member of the public, it was alleged that The American Can Company had filed its required quarterly lobbyist financial report seven days late, on April 17, 1979, in violation of CGS § 1-96.  Under the settlement, Respondent waived its right to a hearing and agreed to pay a fine of $50.00.     

Docket No. 1979-3 In the Matter of Connecticut Beverage Industries.   The Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order, resolving a Complaint filed by a member of the public, resolving allegations that Connecticut Beverage Industries had engaged in lobbying without registering with the Commission when it purchased advertisements to be aired in the broadcast media attempting to influence legislation known as “the Bottle bill” in violation of CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-95 (a).  Respondent agreed to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $340.00 and register as a lobbyist.       

Docket No. 1979-2 In the Matter of Connecticut Citizens for Decency (“CCD”).   On August 3, 1979 the Commission and Respondent entered into a Stipulation and Order in resolution of a Complaint against CCD.  The Complaint, filed by a member of the public, alleged that Connecticut Citizens for Decency engaged in lobbying without a registration, in violation of CGS §§ 1-94 and 1-95, when it purchased two advertisements in The Hartford Courant urging the public to contact legislators to support a particular candidate for the State Board of Education.  The Commission found that the violation was unintentional and imposed no penalty.      

Docket No. 1979-1 In the Matter of Lobby against Raising the Drinking Age (“LARDA”).   The Ethics Commission and LARDA entered into a Stipulation and Order on May 15, 1979 in resolution of a Complaint filed by a member of the public.    The Complaint alleged that LARDA engaged in lobbying without first registering with the Commission, in violation of CGS §§ 1-94 (b) and 1-95 (a).  Under the terms of the settlement, Respondent properly registered and agreed to comply with all provisions of Chapter 10, Part I, Connecticut CGS.  The Commission found that the violation was not willful or intentional, and imposed no penalty.