Published June 3, 2020
By MARK SARDELLA
WAKEFIELD — At its meeting last week, the Town Council gave its most direct response to date regarding what has become a controversial appointment to the Conservation Commission.
The appointee is alleged to have employment connections to a development firm that could in the near future come before the Conservation Commission. Last Thursday, Town Council chair Ann Santos asked Town Counsel Thomas Mullen to give a brief tutorial on conflicts of interest, as they pertain to local officials.
At the their April 13 meeting, the Town Council handled appointments to 12 different committees under their jurisdiction. Two Conservation Commission members’ terms were expiring, and both applied for reappointment. One was a founding member of the commission, Frank J. Luciani, who had served since the commission’s creation in 1983. The other incumbent was Warren Laskey, another long-serving member. Two other individuals also applied for the positions: Kenneth Alepidis, a geologist and environmental consultant; and Michael Owen, an insurance specialist with the Social Security Administration.
The Town Council appointed Laskey and Alepidis. Of the dozen committees appointed that night, Luciani was the only incumbent committee member who was not re-appointed.
Questions were raised as to why Luciani was passed over for re-appointment, and a number of rather pointed letters appeared in the Item Forum along with comments on social media. Some went so far as to question the Town Council’s motives, even to the point of suggesting a level of malfeasance related to possible future development in town, in particular a yet-to-be-filed proposal by Cabot Cabot & Forbes to build 600 units of housing on the former American Mutual/Comverse site at 200 Quannapowitt Parkway.
Several letter writers alleged that the firm that Alepidis works for has done some subcontracting work for Cabot Cabot & Forbes.
While not mentioning the ConCom appointment specifically, Santos pointed out that on any appointed committee, conflicts are bound to arise simply due to the small world of candidates who are available to apply for committee appointments. There is a way to handle such issues, Santos said, and she noted that all town officials, elected or appointed, receive ethics training. If there is a conflict individuals can recuse themselves.
So, “to cure bad facts,” Santos asked Mullen to review how the conflict of interest issue would apply to such appointments by the Town Council.
“Anybody who suspects that they have an ethical issue, or even thinks that he’s got a conflict of interest, is always welcome to call me and I can speak to him confidentially about it,” Mullen said. “They can also speak directly to the state Ethics Commission’s lawyer, who will offer advice.”
Mullen said that during his time as Town Counsel, there has been no reluctance on the part of Wakefield officials to contact him.
“They call me all the time on the merest suspicion that they might have some reason why they should recuse themselves,” Mullen said. “People are very good about self-reporting about this. And well they should be. It’s a crime to violate the state ethics law.”
Mullen noted that every elected and appointed official is provided with information on the state ethics law when they are sworn in by the Town Clerk.
“If, after they think about it or consult with me or the state Ethics Commission, a local official, whether an elected or appointed member of a board, thinks that he may have a financial interest in a matter that comes before him, he is generally supposed to not handle it. He is supposed to step away, recuse himself from it.”
Mullen observed that there are some technical instances where recusal may not be legally required, and that could be determined by consulting with him or the Ethics Commission.
But Mullen stressed that the mere appointment of someone who has worked for a company that may one day have dealings with the town is not in itself a problem.
“The fact that somebody gets appointed to a board and he may, because he is in the private sector, have once dealt with somebody who later comes before his board — that’s really no disqualifier,” Mullen said. “It would be impossible to vet people like that. It would, in effect, preclude virtually anybody who has been in the private sector from contributing their talents to local boards.”
Santos noted that it’s also important for people to reach out to Mullen when they have a concern because what may seem like a conflict of interest to a lay person may not in fact be a conflict.