You are a member of a private consulting firm. You were formerly employed by a state agency (ABC). You ask whether your participation in the ABC application process in regard to certain types of Grants prohibits you from performing consultant services for individual communities who are local recipients of those grant funds. In rendering this opinion, the Commission has been guided by, and will continue to follow for the near future, the interpretations and opinions of the Attorney General issued prior to November 1, 1978, the effective date of the Commission's jurisdiction over Chapter 268A.
You are a former state employee under § 1(q) of the conflict statute. ABC is a state agency as defined in § 1(p). Therefore, you are subject to the prohibitions contained in § 5(a). That section prohibits a former state employee from receiving compensation directly or indirectly from anyone other than the commonwealth or a state agency, in connection with any particular matter in which the commonwealth or state agency is a party or has a direct and substantial interest and in which he participated as a state employee.
Two previous Attorney General Opinions are relevant to your situation. You state you participated in the grant application process but played no role in the actual selection of the grantee. The Attorney General has determined that such involvement is not substantial enough to constitute "participation" within the scope of G.L. c. 268A, § 5(a). See Conflict Opinion Attorney General No. 788. The Attorney General has also determined in a recent opinion that although the grant application process constitutes a particular matter within the meaning of § 1(k) and 5(a) of the conflict of interest law, contracts with municipalities for related services constitute separate particular matters. See Conflict Opinion Attorney General No. 846.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that you may offer consultant services to local communities funded under the federal program without violating G.L. c. 268A.
End Of Decision
