Letter Resolves Conflict of Interest Violation Regarding Dome

Falmouth MA

12 January, 2021

1:50 PM

Description

Falmouth, MA — Allegations that a Falmouth Historical Commission and Community Preservation Commission member violated a conflict of interest law were resolved Tuesday when the State Ethics Commission issued a Public Education Letter. Nicole Goldman, the member, was acting on behalf of a private nonprofit organization when she requested funding and support from the commissions for preserving a geodesic dome built in the 1950s. The conflict of interest law prohibits municipal employees from acting on behalf of anyone other than the municipality in matters "in which the municipality is a party or has a direct or substantial interest." The Public Education Letter states this is to prevent a division in loyalty between the municipality and the other, private entity. The letter states that when Goldman was appointed to the Historical Commission in June 2016, she was already part of a "Working Group" dedicated to preserving the dome, which was built by students of R. Buckminster Fuller, who invented the concept of the geodesic dome. The following year, in December 2017, Goldman asked the Historical Commission to donate $350 to a traveling exhibit about the Dome on behalf of the Working Group, which was denied according to the letter. Six days later, the Working Group was incorporated and became a non-profit, Dome at Woods Hole, with Goldman serving as the president. About six months later, Goldman was appointed to the Community Preservation Commission (CPC) as the Historical Commission's representative. The week following her appointment, she scheduled a meeting on behalf of Dome at Woods Hole with the CPC's administrator, where they discussed using CPC funding for evaluating the Dome's structure and a feasibility study for "Adaptive Re-use of the Dome and Ancillary Structures." According to the letter, Goldman sent a draft of the Request for Proposals, indicating she would be managing the feasibility study, but when the treasurer of the Dome at Woods Hold filed the application for $125,000 in funding from the CPC, Goldman's name did not appear. In July 2018, Goldman acted on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole when she sent a letter to the Historical Commission chairman that sought support from the commission on the Dome' funding application with the CPC, as well as the Commission's nomination of the Dome for a Preservation Massachusetts Most Endangered Historic Resources designation. The letter states that the chairman said to send a letter to the entire Historic Commission regarding the CPC funding—the chairman also suggested what the content of the letter should be. Goldman then sent two draft letters—one about the funding and the other about the nomination—to the chairman, who made more suggestions. In August 2018, Goldman presented to the Historical Commission, acting on behalf of the Dome at Woods Hole. The Commission did not support the CPC funding, but did support the historical designation. The CPC denied the funding request, which was filed Aug. 8, 2018. Goldman resigned from both commissions in 2019, according to the letter. Goldman was found to have violated the law every time she acted as a member of the Dome at Woods Hole or the Working Group, as it was previously titled. Following the State Ethics Commission's finding of reasonable cause that she violated the law, Goldman waived her right to an adjudicatory hearing and agreed to the issuance of the Public Education letter. The letter is intended to explain the conflict of interest law, and help public employees better understand it and how to comply with it. When a Public Education Letter is issued, there will be no other penalty, such as a fine. The Ethics Commission is a civil law enforcement agency—punishment of violations of the conflict of interest law could not include criminal charges, according to public information officer Gerry Tuoti. Tuoti said he could not comment on anything outside of the scope of the letter, including when the violation of the law was brought to the attention of the Ethics Commission, who brought it, or if Goldman was aware she was violating it at the time. The Ethics Commission wrote in the letter that it is not aware that Goldman had any personal financial benefit, or that the Town of Falmouth lost any money.