Final Adjudications Issued - Rajput & Benton

The Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission has issued a final adjudication in the following matters under 

The Ethics Act

HARRISBURG, PA – 

  

1. Vijay Rajput, Ph.D., P.E. (“Rajput”), Managing Director of the Lower Bucks County Joint Municipal Authority (“LBCJMA”), fully and unequivocally denies having committed any violation of the Ethics Act, including but not limited to his alleged private use of the storage shed/common area, but without admitting any violation and solely for purposes of resolution of this matter, Dr. Rajput agrees that if this matter went to a hearing, and Respondent presented no other exculpatory evidence in support of his defense at hearing, the Investigative Division could, by circumstantial evidence, meet the requisite evidentiary standard, and that a fact finder could find based on that evidence that he violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), by continuing to use the LBCJMA storage shed/common area, absent any fee or charge, to teach PADEP classes for LBCJMA and other area municipal authority employees, after being appointed Managing Director, through S2A Technologies, Inc., resulting in a pecuniary gain directly or indirectly to S2A and/or himself, without obtaining formal approval by a vote of the LBCJMA Board of Directors.

2. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent is ordered to fulfill his agreement that S2A make a voluntary donation in the amount of $5,000.00 payable to LBCJMA and forwarded to the Pennsylvania State Ethics Commission for delivery to the LBCJMA by no later than the thirtieth (30th) day after the mailing date of this Order. 

3. Per the Consent Agreement of the parties, Respondent is ordered to not ask for or accept any reimbursement, compensation or other payment from the LBCJMA representing a full or partial reimbursement of the donation made by S2A.

4. Respondent is directed to fulfill the terms of the parties’ Consent Agreement by doing the following to avoid any future appearance of impropriety and/or potential conflict of interest:

a. Respondent will not utilize LBCJMA’s physical facilities, including the storage shed/common area, to conduct any trainings or perform any work outside the scope of his direct employment with the LBCJMA, including trainings or other work on behalf of himself, S2A, or any other private entity for private payment, without first obtaining approval by a vote of the LBCJMA Board of Directors, which shall have the exclusive discretion to determine whether Respondent and/or S2A may utilize the LBCJMA’s facilities, the amount of any fee or charge that shall be required to be paid, if any, and any other conditions that the LBCJMA’s Board of Directors shall deem to be appropriate.  The Investigative Division may advise the LBCJMA’s Board members by a written letter, which may be sent to their attorney to forward to the Board, that they are entitled to charge a reasonable fee for S2A to use its facilities, if they wish. 

b. While maintaining that he has to date had no involvement in any decision-making by the LBCJMA Board of Directors regarding this matter, Respondent shall abstain from having any involvement in any decision by the LBCJMA’s Board of Directors to approve of his or S2A’s use of the LBCJMA’s physical facilities and/or any fees or charges paid to or received by the LBCJMA in relation to classes taught by Respondent on behalf of S2A taken by LBCJMA’s employees.

c. Without intending to make any admission of any wrongdoing, and while Respondent maintains that he properly adheres to the LBCJMA’s policies and procedures regarding leave usage and has not engaged in in any consulting work on behalf of S2A in violation of his terms of employment, Respondent shall comply with LBCJMA’s policies and procedures regarding the documentation of his leave usage when performing any consulting work on behalf of S2A and shall refrain from engaging in any private business matters in violation of the terms of his employment.

5. Compliance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Order will result in the closing of this case with no further action by the Commission.

a. Non-compliance will result in the institution of an order enforcement action.

1. As a Member and President of Council for Homestead Borough (“Borough”), Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, at all times relevant to the instant matter, Respondent Louise Benton (“Benton”) was a public official subject to the provisions of the Public Official and Employee Ethics Act (“Ethics Act”), 65 Pa.C.S. § 1101 et seq.

2. Benton violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when she utilized the authority of her public position for the private pecuniary benefit of a member of her immediate family – her son – and/or a business with which her son is associated, namely AW Construction, when she caused the Borough to engage/hire/contract with her son and/or AW Construction to perform construction/remodeling work on behalf of the Borough. 

3. Benton did not violate Section 1103(f) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(f), when the contract/agreement between the Borough and her son and/or AW Construction was in excess of $500.00 and was awarded absent an open and public process, in that Benton was neither a party to the contract nor a principal of the contracting business.   

4. Benton violated Section 1103(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1103(a), when she authorized issuance of payment of Borough monies to her son and/or AW Construction and served as a Borough signatory on Borough checks issued to her son and/or AW Construction.

5. Benton violated Section 1104(a) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(a), when she failed to file Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2015, 2016, and 2017 with the Borough.  

6. Benton violated Sections 1105(b)(5) and 1105(b)(8) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. §§ 1105(b)(5), 1105(b)(8), when she filed deficient Statements of Financial Interests by: (a) failing to disclose Clark Memorial Baptist Church as a source of income on a Statement of Financial Interests for calendar year 2018; (b) failing to disclose the Borough as a source of income on Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2018 and 2019; and (c) failing to disclose her employment with Clark Memorial Baptist Church on Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2018 and 2019.  

7. To the extent Benton received compensation from the Borough when she did not have complete and accurate Statements of Financial Interests on file with the Borough, such compensation was received in contravention of Section 1104(d) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1104(d).  

8. Notice of the delinquency of Benton’s Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2015, 2016, and 2017 and of the deficiency of her Statements of Financial Interests for calendar years 2018 and 2019 was previously served upon her in accordance with Section 1107(5) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § 1107(5).

9. Based upon the totality of the circumstances in this case, five maximum civil penalties in the total amount of $1,250.00 are warranted.   

You may access the full text version of the above rulings by clicking on the link below or by copying and pasting them into your browser: