Settlement  In the Matter of Robert Farley

Date:	10/11/2017
Organization:	State Ethics Commission
Docket Number:	255

Disposition Agreement

This disposition agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the State Ethics Commission ("Commission") and Robert Farley ("Mr. Farley") pursuant to section 11 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(d). 

On August 16, 1983, the Commission initiated a preliminary inquiry, pursuant to G. L. c. 268B, s.4(a), into possible violations of the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, involving Mr. Farley, acting supervisor of the Division of Elevator Inspections in the Department 

Page 187 

of Public Safety. The Commission has concluded that preliminary inquiry and, on March 12, 1984, found reasonable cause to believe that Mr. Farley violated G.L. c. 268A, s.6. 

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

1. Except for a nine-month period in August, 1981, Mr. Farley has been an elevator inspector for the Division of Elevator Inspections under the jurisdiction of the Department of Public Safety since 1979. For the past year and a half he has been the acting supervisor of that division. As an inspector, he is a state employee as defined in s.1(q) of G.L. c. 268A. 

2. While employed as a state elevator inspector, Mr. Farley was hired by two elevator companies, Otis Elevator (Otis) and Montgomery Elevator (Montgomery), to do what is referred to in the industry as "stand-by" work. This work required the presence of a union mechanic at a job site when non-union personnel drilled hydraulic wells. Although the union bargaining agreement mandates the presence of a union member, it has traditionally been a "no- show" position. Mr. Farley was paid $12,000 in total by Otis and Montgomery for approximately 750 hours of this no-show work. 

3. As an elevator inspector, Mr. Farley conducted safety inspections on several hundred elevators either built by or under a service contract with Otis or Montgomery. Consequently, Montgomery and Otis each had a financial interest in the outcome of numerous safety inspections conducted by Mr. Farley. 

4. Section 6 of G.L. c. 268A prohibits a state employee from participating in a particular matter in which his employer has a financial interest. 

5. Therefore, Mr. Farley violated G.L. c. 268A, s.6 on each occasion he conducted an inspection as a state inspector of an elevator either built by Otis or Montgomery or on which Otis or Montgomery had a service contract, while at the same time he was employed by Otis and Montgomery. 

In view of the foregoing multiple violations of G. L. c. 268A, s.6, 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 and conditions agreed to by Mr. Farley: 

1. that he pay to the Commission the sum of $6500 as a civil penalty for violating G.L. c. 268A, s.6; 

2. that in the future he refrain from participating as a state elevator inspector in any particular matter, including safety inspections, in which a business organization by which he is employed has a financial interest, and; 

3. that he waive all rights to contest the findings of fact, conclusions of law and terms and conditions contained in this Agreement or any related administrative or judicial proceeding to which the Commission is a party.