You are on page 1of 1

cotrtFllcT oF




Gld Harket Ptaca {Soldieds Pass LLC}

The Old Msrket Place developrnent involvsd esseniially two decisions: whether to aporove he initial deve{opment proposal, and whether to approve a one (1) year extension requested by tre dweloper. The initialdevelopment proposal was submrhed in September, 1997. The SCDD files show that Roger Easfnan was the lead staff person on the matter. John O'Brien. as the Director of SCDD, supervised Mr. Eastman, reviewed the staff report and racommndation b the SP&ZC, and accepted the recomrTrendation project, which was submitted to the SP&ZC on Decernber 2, i997. With respest to the development proposal, John O'Brien did not declare a confiict of interesl He states in his interview that he consulted John Paladini, as he had in ccnneCion wtth flre AItl/PM daveloprnent, and tirat Mr. Paladini again advised him, as he had be4ore, that because Claire was not involved in the particular property being reviewed by SCDD, there uras no conflict of interesr. Relying on this advice, Mr. O'Brien explained, he dki not Caclare a mnflict of inieresl

With respect to Soldiels Pass LLC's requestfor a one (1) year extension (within whiclr to obtain necessary and appropriate land use pennrts), submitted by Mr Milier and Mr. Sheehan on October 2, 1998. Mr. O'Brien stated that he was concemed about a potential confrict because at trat time there was a possibility that Claire. might do some leasing wsr* on the Old Mari<ei Place pmperty. For this reason, Mr. O'Brien states that he again sought advice frorn Mr. Paladini, and that Mr. Paladini advised him fnat he did not have a conffict of interest because Claire was not presently involved in teasing of fne proprty, but that the siiuation might reate the appeamnce of a conflict and therefore Mr. O'Brien shouH dedare a conflici- Mr. O'Brien did d-dclare a conflict at the public hearing before the SP&ZC. No ccnfliC appears to have been declared, l'rowever, at the time SCDD starf submiited its repori to SP&ZC on December 1. 1998. The report recommends approval of the request for an extensicn. John O'Brien reviewed and apprcved the report.


Whetrerthe conflict of interest laws were violated does not depend on Mr. O'Brien's motirres or on the acfr.ral receipt of a benefit from his having participated in the community development process. Nor does the issue hinge on a showing of hamr to any particular indtvirjual or to the community as a whole. Rather, the issue is whether John O'Brien or his wtfe, Claire, had a 'substantiat interest" in the land use decisions in
which John O'Brien participated-