Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consent Orders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves a slate of consent orders, including a six-figure combined penalty in a high‑value case
Summary
At the Dec. 13 meeting the commission approved multiple consent orders resolving enforcement matters; the largest proposed consent involved a former Fulton County candidate and included a $43,000 aggregate penalty.
The Government Transparency & Campaign Finance Commission approved a set of consent orders at its Dec. 13 meeting, resolving multiple enforcement matters with civil penalties and late‑fee arrangements. Staff presented the consent orders and commissioners approved them collectively under the commission’s consent‑order process.
Key consent orders highlighted by staff included:
- Patrick LeMagg (case 23-0037-C): Staff said this case involved multiple disclosure and reporting violations, including undisclosed transfers and expenditures tied to the respondent’s spouse’s LLCs and other entities. The parties agreed to a consent order resolving six violations with a combined penalty of $43,000 ($42,500 civil penalty plus $500 in late fees), staff said.
- Manswell Peterson (case 21-0015-C): A 2021 matter alleging inflated or improperly itemized contributions resolved for $3,000; staff said the amount was reduced, in part, to account for the respondent’s status as a disabled veteran and limited means.
- A series of smaller consent orders: Staff presented multiple other consent agreements resolving single‑ or two‑count cases for mostly statutory late fees and modest civil penalties (examples included Bette/Betty Lauren Wallace, Travis Turner, Jack Taylor, Michael Gordon, Jacqueline Walls and others), with typical totals in the $250–$1,000 range depending on counts and circumstances.
Why this matters: Consent orders resolve enforcement matters without contested hearings. The commissions’ approval binds respondents to the agreed penalties and can include payment plans, late‑fee assessments and corrective filings. Staff noted that reduced fines may be offered in hardship cases and that where respondents have paid late fees before a complaint was filed, staff may administratively dismiss or treat the matter differently.
Next steps: The approved consent orders will be finalized and posted as commission orders per usual procedure. Staff said some matters required corrected paperwork before final signatures were circulated; the commission approved the slate subject to those clerical corrections.
