Letter Ruling  Public Education Letter in the Matter of Nicole Goldman

Date:	01/12/2021
Organization:	State Ethics Commission
Referenced Sources:	G.L. c. 268A, the Conflict of Interest Law, as Amended by c. 194, Acts of 2011

Public Education Letter: Nicole Goldman

January 12, 2021

Dear Ms. Goldman:

As you know, the State Ethics Commission conducted a preliminary inquiry into whether you violated the state conflict of interest law by, while serving as a Town of Falmouth Historical Commission  (“Historical Commission”) member and a Town of Falmouth Community Preservation Committee (“CPC”) member, acting as agent for your private nonprofit organization in connection with matters in which the Town of Falmouth had interests. On September 17, 2020, the Commission voted to find reasonable cause to believe that your actions, as described below, repeatedly violated §17(c) of the conflict of interest law, General Laws chapter 268A, and authorized adjudicatory proceedings.

The Commission has determined, however, that, in lieu of adjudicatory proceedings, the public interest would be better served by publicly discussing the facts revealed by the preliminary inquiry and explaining the application of the law to those facts in this Public Education Letter. By resolving this matter through this Public Education Letter, the Commission expects that public employees in circumstances similar to those described below will have a clearer understanding of the conflict of interest law and how to comply with it in future conduct. 

The Commission and you agree that this matter will be resolved publicly with this educational letter and that there will be no formal proceedings against you. You have chosen not to exercise your right to a hearing before the Commission.  

The Facts

Background

The Nautilus Motor Inn and the Dome Restaurant are located on a 5.4 acre parcel (the “Property”) in Falmouth. The restaurant’s dome (the “Dome”) was constructed in or about 1953 by students of R. Buckminster Fuller, a famous architect and inventor. The Property has been vacant for over 10 years. A portion of the Property is located in a designated Historic District.

In or about June 2016, the Town of Falmouth Select Board (“BOS”) appointed you to the Historical Commission. At that time, you were also part of a private working group devoted to preserving the Dome (“Working Group”). The Working Group eventually became the Dome at Woods Hole, Inc. (“Dome at Woods Hole”), a private non-profit corporation you organized to preserve the Dome and create an arts center.

Request for Historical Commission Donation

On December 5, 2017, you made an oral request to the Historical Commission that it donate $350 to an educational travelling exhibit involving the history, structure and importance of the Dome. You requested the donation on behalf of the Working Group. At the suggestion of the Historical Commission chairman, you later submitted the Working Group’s funding request in writing. The Historical Commission did not make the $350 donation.

On December 11, 2017, you incorporated Dome at Woods Hole and became its president.

Meeting Regarding Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC Funding Application

On June 5, 2018, the Historical Commission appointed you as its representative on the CPC.

By email dated June 13, 2018, you arranged on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole a meeting with the CPC’s administrator and its outside consultant to discuss a proposed application by the private organization for CPC funding. You and the organization planned to use the CPC funding for a Historic Structures Report, a Structural Analysis of the Dome and a program Feasibility Study for Adaptive Re-use of the Dome and Ancillary Structures (the “Feasibility Study”). You participated in this meeting on behalf of Dome at Woods Hole on June 28, 2018. After the meeting, you sent a packet of documents to the CPC, including a draft Request for Proposals to conduct the Feasibility Study. The draft RFP indicated that you would manage the Feasibility Study.

On August 8, 2018, the Treasurer of the Dome at Woods Hole filed the organization’s application for $125,000 in CPC funding for “a feasibility study to perform a technical, structural, economic and operational analysis of preserving, restoring and transforming” the Dome into a contemporary cultural center. Your name did not appear on the application.

Request for Historical Commission Support of Dome at Wood’s Hole’s CPC Funding Application and Request for Historical Commission Nomination of the Dome for Endangered Historic Resources Designation

On July 17, 2018, you sent an email on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole to the Historical Commission chairman seeking: (1) Historical Commission support for the Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC funding application, and (2) Historical Commission nomination of the Dome for a Preservation Massachusetts Most Endangered Historic Resources designation. The Historical Commission chairman suggested that you send a letter to the Historical Commission regarding the CPC funding application and suggested content for the letter.

By email dated July 24, 2018, you sent two draft letters on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole to the Historical Commission chairman. One letter requested endorsement of the Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC funding application and the second letter requested the nomination of the Dome for the endangered historic resources designation. The Historical Commission chairman made further suggestions on the letter seeking support for the CPC funding application. The conflict of interest law implications of your letters were not raised at this time.

On August 7, 2018, you made a presentation to the Historical Commission on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole. As part of your presentation, you asked the Historical Commission to support the Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC funding application and requested the nomination of the Dome for the endangered historic resources designation. The conflict of interest law implications of your presentation were not raised at this time.

The Historical Commission supported the Dome’s endangered historic resources designation but not the Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC funding application. The Dome at Woods Hole treasurer filed the CPC application for funding on August 8, 2018. The CPC denied the funding request. 

The Commission is not aware of any evidence that you personally financially benefitted or that the Town of Falmouth suffered any economic harm from your above-described actions.

You resigned from both the Historical Commission and the CPC in 2019. 

Legal Discussion

Section 17(c) of the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, prohibits a municipal employee from, other than in the proper discharge of her official duties, acting as agent or attorney for anyone other than the municipality in relation to any particular matter in which the municipality is a party or has a direct and substantial interest. The purpose of this prohibition is to prevent a municipal employee from dividing her loyalty between her public employer and a private entity.

As an appointed member of the Historical Commission and of the CPC, you were a municipal employee of the Town of Falmouth. As such, you were subject to the restrictions of            § 17(c). The Commission found reasonable cause to believe you violated § 17(c) each time you acted on behalf of the Working Group or the Dome at Woods Hole in relation to particular matters in which the Town of Falmouth was a party or had a direct and substantial interest during your service as a member of the Historical Commission and the CPC.

First, when you requested the $350 donation from the Historical Commission for the travelling Dome exhibit, the Historical Commission decision whether to award the $350 grant was a particular matter. You acted as agent for the Working Group in relation to that matter by requesting the funds on its behalf from the Historical Commission. Seeking funds from the Historical Commission on behalf of a private organization was not in the proper discharge of your official duties as a Historical Commission member. The Town of Falmouth was a party to and had a direct and substantial interest in the Historical Commission’s decision whether to grant the funding. Therefore, the Commission found reasonable cause to believe you violated § 17(c) by these actions.    

Second, the Dome at Woods Hole’s application for CPC funding was a particular matter. You acted as agent for the Dome at Woods Hole in relation to its application by: (1) initiating and participating in a meeting with the CPC administrator and the outside consultant to discuss the application, and (2) sending a packet of documents to the CPC as a follow up to the meeting. The Town of Falmouth was a party and had a direct and substantial interest in Dome at Woods Hole’s application for CPC funding. Acting as agent for the Dome at Woods Hole in its efforts to secure funding from the CPC was not in the proper discharge of your official duties either as a CPC member or a Historical Commission member. Thus, the Commission found reasonable cause to believe you violated § 17(c) by these actions.

Finally, the Historical Commission’s decisions whether to send letters supporting the Dome at Woods Hole’s CPC funding application and to nominate the Dome for the endangered historic resources designation were particular matters. You acted as agent for the Dome at Woods Hole by: (1) sending emails requesting support to the Historical Commission chairman, (2) drafting letters to the Historical Commission, and (3) making a presentation to the Historical Commission. The Town of Falmouth was a party and had a direct and substantial interest in whether the Historical Commission supported the Dome at Woods Hole’s request for CPC funding and nominated the Dome for the endangered historic resources designation. Acting on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole was not in the proper discharge of your official duties as an Historical Commission or a CPC member. Therefore, the Commission found reasonable cause to believe you violated § 17(c) by these actions.

Disposition

Based upon its review of this matter, the Commission has determined that the public interest would be best served by the issuance of this Public Educational Letter and that your receipt of this letter should be sufficient to ensure your understanding of and future compliance with the conflict of interest law.

This matter is now closed.

 

Sincerely,

David A. Wilson

Executive Director