Settlement  Disposition Agreement in the Matter of Karon Hathaway

Date:	09/26/2023
Organization:	State Ethics Commission
Docket Number:	23-0014
Location:	Boston, MA
Referenced Sources:	G.L. c. 268A, the Conflict of Interest Law, as Amended by c. 194, Acts of 2011

Disposition Agreement

The State Ethics Commission (“Commission”) and Karon Hathaway (“Hathaway”) enter into this Disposition Agreement pursuant to Section 3 of the Commission’s Enforcement Procedures. This Agreement constitutes a consented-to final order enforceable in the Superior Court, pursuant to G.L. c. 268B, § 4(j). 

On October 20, 2022, the Commission initiated a preliminary inquiry, pursuant to G.L. c. 268B, § 4(a), into possible violations of the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, by Hathaway. On May 18, 2023, the Commission concluded its inquiry and found reasonable cause to believe that Hathaway violated G.L. c. 268A, § 23(b)(2)(i).

The Commission and Hathaway now agree to the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:

Findings of Fact

1. Hathaway was a member of the Huntington Selectboard from May 2020 to May 2022.  
2. In April 2022, municipalities in Franklin County, including the Town of Huntington (“Town”), repaved their respective portions of Route 66.
3. The Franklin Regional Council of Governments facilitated the bids. Each town provided its own specifications, including the surface area to be repaved, and the disposition of the ground-up asphalt.
4. The ground-up asphalt, or “millings,” can be used as an alternative to gravel for driveways and roads.
5. Each municipality elected one of the following options: (A) to retain the excess millings and have the contractor deliver the millings to a designated town location; (B) to retain the excess millings and have the contractor load the millings onto town trucks at the work site; or (C) to have the contractor remove and retain the millings.
6. Huntington’s then Highway Superintendent provided the Town’s specifications. He elected Option A, to have the Town retain the millings and have the contractor deliver the millings to a designated town location.
7. Each municipality that elected Option A used the same contractor (“Contractor”) and signed a contract with that company.
8. On April 11, 2022, approximately one week before the work began, the then Highway Superintendent sent an e-mail to the Contractor’s sales representative confirming that the millings were to be brought to the Town Highway Department garage.
9. The Contractor subcontracted with local companies to haul the millings from the jobsite to the Town’s Highway Department garage.
10. One of the companies hired to haul the millings from the job site to the Town’s Highway Department garage was a local excavation company owned and operated by Hathaway’s nephew (“Excavation Company”).
11. On April 12, 2022, the Contractor’s sales representative hired the Excavation Company by sending its owner a text message with details including the date, time, jobsite address, and the Town’s Highway Department garage as the site to dump the millings. 
12. On April 13, 2022, Hathaway sent a text message to the then Highway Superintendent asking how many trucks were lined up for the work, and stating that she “hope[d]” the millings were going back to the “yard,” or Highway Department garage. The then Highway Superintendent confirmed that the millings would be brought to the own yard. Hathaway responded, “Perfect.”
13. The job took place from Wednesday, April 20, 2022, through Friday, April 22, 2022.
14. The Excavation Company worked on-site for all three days of work. Hathaway’s nephew was not present on-site. Instead, he hired a local driver (“Driver”) to operate his company’s truck during the job.
15. Hathaway knew that her nephew had hired the Driver to operate his company’s truck during the job. Hathaway had no relationship with the Driver.  
16. On the first day of work, Hathaway’s nephew instructed the Driver to deliver millings to Hathaway’s home, about half a mile from the jobsite.
17. When the Driver arrived at Hathaway’s home, he saw a large plywood sign stating, “Dump Here” with an arrow near the driveway. Hathaway knew or had reason to know of the sign.
18. The Driver delivered four to six loads of millings to Hathaway’s home on the first afternoon of work.
19. Subsequently, the Driver was instructed by the then Highway Superintendent to deliver all millings to the Highway Department garage. The Highway Superintendent told the Driver to stop delivering millings to Hathaway’s home, and that, as a Selectboard member, Hathaway knew that the millings were to be delivered to the Highway Department garage.
20. The Town Administrative Assistant called Hathaway because a local resident had reported that she saw millings being delivered to Hathaway’s home. Hathaway told the Administrative Assistant that she had bought the millings. The Administrative Assistant told Hathaway to return the millings to the Town. Hathaway stated that she did not have the necessary equipment and would not do so.
21. The then Highway Superintendent also called Hathaway. He told her that all millings were supposed to have been brought to the Highway Department garage, and Hathaway indicated that she understood.
22. The next day, Hathaway’s nephew instructed the Driver to deliver additional loads of millings to Hathaway’s home.
23. The Driver told Hathaway’s nephew that the then-Highway Superintendent had told him not to deliver millings to Hathaway’s home, and that, as a Selectboard member, Hathaway knew the millings were to go to the Highway Department garage. Hathaway’s nephew accurately informed the Driver that he had spoken with Hathaway and that Hathaway said it was fine and to bring her additional loads.
24. The Driver believed that, as a Selectboard member, Hathaway’s directions superseded those of the then Highway Superintendent.
25. The Driver delivered at least two additional loads of millings to Hathaway’s home.
26. In total, Hathaway received at least eight loads of the Town-owned millings, valued at approximately $5,000. Hathaway did not pay for the millings or their delivery.
27. Hathaway did not question the millings being delivered to her home or seek or take any action to have them removed and brought to the Town Highway Department garage. Instead, Hathaway’s husband spread the millings over their driveway within several days of their delivery. Once the millings mixed with their driveway materials, they could not be returned to the Town.

Conclusions of Law

Section 23(b)(2)(i)

28. Section 23(b)(2)(i) prohibits a municipal employee from knowingly, or with reason to know, soliciting or receiving anything of substantial value which is not otherwise authorized by statute or regulation, for or because of her official position.
29. As a Huntington Selectboard member, Hathaway was a municipal employee as defined by G.L. c. 268A, § 1(g).
30. Hathaway solicited and received at least eight loads of Town-owned millings.
31. The millings, worth approximately $5,000, were of substantial value.
32. Hathaway knew or had reason to know that she received the millings for or because of her official position. Hathaway knew that all millings were to be retained by the Town, and that all trucks would be instructed to deliver the millings to the Highway Department garage. Hathaway knew or had reason to know that the Driver was directed to deliver the millings to the Highway Department garage by the then Highway Superintendent. Hathaway knew or had reason to know that her nephew would convey her position on the Selectboard to his Driver when he instructed him to ignore the then Highway Superintendent’s directions and bring millings to Hathaway’s home.
33. Hathaway’s solicitation and/or receipt of the Town-owned millings for her personal use was not otherwise authorized by statute or regulation.
34. Therefore, by receiving approximately $5,000 worth of Town-owned millings, for her personal use, Hathaway knowingly or with reason to know solicited and received something of substantial value which was not otherwise authorized by statute or regulation, for or because of her official position. In so doing, Hathaway violated § 23(b)(2)(i). 

Disposition

In view of the foregoing violation of G.L. c. 268A by Hathaway, the Commission has determined that the public interest would be served by the disposition of this matter without further enforcement proceedings, on the following terms and conditions agreed to by Hathaway:

(1)       that Hathaway pay to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, with such payment to be delivered to the Commission, the sum of $5,000 as a civil penalty for violating G.L. c. 268A, § 23(b)(2)(i); and

(2)       that Hathaway waive all rights to contest, in this or any other administrative or judicial proceeding to which the Commission is or may be a party, the findings of fact, conclusions of law and terms and conditions contained in this Agreement.

By signing below, Hathaway acknowledges that she has personally read this Disposition Agreement, that it is a public document, and that she agrees to its terms and conditions.