Date: | 01/22/1997 |
---|---|
Organization: | State Ethics Commission |
Docket Number: | 561 |
- This page, In the Matter of Roger W. Howlett, is offered by
- State Ethics Commission
Settlement In the Matter of Roger W. Howlett
Table of Contents
Disposition Agreement
This Disposition Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the State Ethics Commission ("Commission") and Roger W. Howlett ("Howlett") pursuant to Section 5 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, s.40).
On February 14, 1996, the Commission initiated, pursuant to G.L. c. 268B, s.4(a), a preliminary inquiry into possible violations of the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, by Howlett. The Commission has concluded its inquiry and, on January 15, 1997, found reasonable cause to believe that Howlett violated G.L. c. 268A, s. 19.
The Commission and Howlett now agree to the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
1. At all relevant times Howlett was an elected assessor for the Town of Raynham. As such, Howlett was a municipal employee as that term is defined in G.L. c. 268A, s.1(g).
2. In July 1995, the Raynham Assessor's office posted a position for a full-time senior clerk in the assessor's office.
3. At that time the senior clerk position paid an hourly wage of approximately $10.00, with benefits, but no overtime.
4. The assessors received ten applications for the position, and from those an assessor and the assistant assessor selected the four candidates to interview.[1] One of the four candidates was Lisa McDonald ("McDonald"), Howlett's daughter.
5. Before interviewing the applicants at an assessor's meeting on July 25, 1995, Howlett, the other two assessors and the assistant to the assessors discussed questions to ask the candidates (during their interviews).
Howlett participated in this discussion and suggested some of the questions which the candidates were asked.
6. At the assessor's meeting on July 25, 1995,each of the four candidates met individually with Howlett, the other two assessors and the assistant.
7. Howlett sat in on each interview, including the interview of his daughter, McDonald. Most of the questions were asked by one of the other assessors, but, Howlett asked a few questions of some of the candidates. (Howlett, however, did not ask his daughter any questions.)
8. According to the Assessors' minutes of July 25, 1995, "Mr. Lynn, Mr. Ritchie, and Maureen voted for Lisa McDonald. Mr. Howlett abstained from voting. "[2]
9. On July 26, 1995, McDonald began working at the assessor's office as the senior clerk. The nine applicants who were not hired were sent letters signed by Howlett as chairman of the board of assessors, informing them that the position had been filled.[3]
10. Section 19 of G.L. c. 268A, except as permitted by paragraph (b) of that section, prohibits a municipal employee from participating as such an employee in a particular matter in which to his knowledge, he or an immediate family member[4] has a financial interest. None of the exceptions contained in s. 19(b) apply in this case.
11. The determination to hire someone for the full time senior clerk position was a particular matter.[5]
12. As set forth above, Howlett participate[6] as an assessor in the hiring determination by proposing questions and participating in the interviews.
13. As an applicant for the senior clerk position, McDonald had a financial interest in the appointment to this position. Howlett knew of his daughter's financial interest at the time he participated in the hiring process.
14. Accordingly, by participating in the hiring process for the position, as set forth above, Howlett participated as an assessor in a particular matter in which he knew that an immediate family member had a financial interest, thereby violating G.L. c. 268A, s.19.[7]
15. Howlett cooperated with the Commission's investigation.
Page 859
In view of the foregoing violations of G.L. c. 268A by Howlett, 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 Howlett:[8]
(1) that Howlett pay to the Commission the sum of five hundred dollars ($500.00) as a civil penalty for violating G.L. c. 268A, s.19 as stated above;
(2) that Howlett will act in conformance with the requirements of G. L. c. 268A, s. 19 in the future; and
(3) that Howlett waive all rights to contest the findings of fact, conclusions of law and terms and conditions contained in this Agreement in this or any other related administrative or judicial proceedings to which the Commission is or may be a party.