Docket No. 334

In the Matter of Frank Baj

June 10, 1987

Disposition Agreement



This Disposition Agreement (Agreement) is entered into between
the State Ethics Commission (Commission) and Frank Baj (Mr. Baj)
pursuant to section II of the Commission's Enforcement Procedures.
This Agreement constitutes a consented to final Commission order
enforceable in the Superior Court pursuant to G.L. c. 268B,
s.4(j). On July 29,1986 the Commission initiated a preliminary
inquiry into possible violations of the conflict of interest law,
G.L. c. 268A, involving Mr. Baj, a former building inspector in the
Town of Hadley. The Commission concluded its inquiry on January
12, 1987, finding reasonable cause to believe that Mr. Baj violated
G.L. c. 268A, s. 19.

The parties now agree to the following findings of fact and
conclusions of law.

1. Mr. Baj was a part-time Hadley building inspector from 1978
through 1985. As a building inspector, Mr. Baj was a municipal
employee as that term is defined in G.L. c. 268A, s. 1(g).

2. Mr. Baj was appointed by the Board of Selectmen. His basic
duties were to review plans, issue permits, inspect buildings, and
issue occupancy permits, all to insure that construction complied
with the state building codes.

3. At all times relevant herein, Mr. Baj also carried on a sole
proprietorship contractor business through which he built new
homes, additions, and did remodeling.

4. Mr. Baj issued building permit No. 25-1983 on April 20,1983
for the construction of an addition at 17 Arrowhead Drive. At the
time Mr. Baj issued this permit, he knew he would be doing the
private construction work pursuant to that permit.

5. On or about October 9,1984, Mr. Baj issued a building permit
No. 48-1984 for the construction of a one story dwelling at 63
Shattuck Road. At the time, Mr. Baj issued this permit, he knew
that he was doing the private construction work which was the
subject of the permit.

6. On or about February 12,1985, Mr. Baj issued an occupancy
permit for the construction at 63 Shattuck Road. This occupancy
permit signified that all the work, including work done by Mr. Baj,
had been properly completed and that the building was suitable for
occupancy.[1]

7. Except as otherwise permitted in that section, G.L. c. 268A,
s.19 in pertinent part prohibits a municipal employee from
participating as such in a particular matter in which he has a
financial interest.

8. None of the exceptions in s.19 applies to this matter.

9. By issuing building permits for construction at 17
Arrowhead Drive and 63 Shattuck Road at a time when he knew he would be or
was the private contractor for the work pursuant to those permits,
and by issuing the occupancy permit for a building signifying that
all work, including work done by him, had been completed properly,
Mr. Baj participated in particular matters in which he had a
financial interest, thereby violating s.19.

Based on the foregoing facts, the Commission has determined that
the public interest would be served by the disposition of this
matter without further enforcement proceedings on the basis of the
following terms agreed to by Mr. Baj:

1. that he pay to the Commission the amount of $500 (five hundred)
as a civil penalty for his violations of s.19; and

2. that he waive all rights to contest the find- t ings of fact,
conclusions of law and terms and

Page 296

conditions in this or any related administrative or judicial
proceedings in which the Commission is a party.

---------------

[1] It is unclear who issued the occupancy permit for the work
done at 17 Arrowhead Road. Many of the Building Department
records are missing and there is no record indicating who issued
the occupancy permit or the construction done pursuant to permit
No. 25-1983 at 17 Arrowhead Road.