Paul working for you.

Wednesday, November 15, 2017

Cui Bono ? Who Benefits?

Cui Bono ?  Who Benefits?

Definition of cui bono. 1 :a principle that probable responsibility for an act or event lies with one having something to gain. 

Zoning Change articles:

Both Zoning By-law articles were eventually passed over at the STM last night.

So who would have benefited?
 An interesting comment:

An interesting thing happened on the way to the Town

OK, so taking my time getting moving I decided to do some review of the Warrant articles in preparation to attend the town meeting tonight.

I found what I consider to be a very curious happening. Article 13 presented by the Planning Board.

Planning board members are:

Kirk Moschetti---Chairman
Charles Carrol - Vice Chairman
Tim Rotti
John Buckley
Christof Chartier
Frank Moschetti
Dennis Rich

Parcels listed in zoning change, owners:

Kirk Moschetti----------- Parcel 20.5
Frank Moschetti---------- Parcel 20
John Buckley------------- Parcels 23, 23.10, 23.20
Charles Carrol----------- Parcel 36

Four members of the 7 member planning Board are the listed owners of property they voted to have re-zoned. How did they achieve a quorom? How does this comply with Ethics standards?

Mr Fortes assured the voters during a board meeting that everything was on the up and up and had been checked into. "nothing hinky going on" was I believe the exact quote.

I call 4 members of a 7 member board apparently voting to benefit themselves, HINKY!

 Interesting Comments from Town Counsel regarding these Zoning Articles:

1. Town Counsel was NOT consulted by the Planning Board regarding any possible conflicts of interest by members of the Planning Board and these articles.

2. Any opinions given to members of the Planning Board by the State Ethics Commission(oxymoron?) are private and not made public.

3.  The Planning Board may have invoked the "Rule of Necessity" in order to vote on these articles without a conflict of interest.



  1. When I asked the question of counsel last night at the meeting I was disappointed by the response.

    Section 6A: Conflict of interest of public official; reporting requirement

    Section 6A. Any public official, as defined by section one of chapter two hundred and sixty-eight B, who in the discharge of his official duties would be required knowingly to take an action which would substantially affect such official's financial interests, unless the effect on such an official is no greater than the effect on the general public, shall file a written description of the required action and the potential conflict of interest with the state ethics commission established by said chapter two hundred and sixty-eight B.

    This doesn't appear to leave options. It says WRITTEN.

    This explanation is from the Advisory 05-5 detailing the "Rule of necessity"

    I found this part interesting.

    "If one or more members of an elected board have ”appearances” of conflicts of interest that can be dispelled by making a written disclosure, the rule of necessity may not be invoked. Section 23(b)(3) of the conflict of interest law prohibits a public official from acting in a manner which would cause a reasonable person, having knowledge of the relevant circumstances, to conclude that the public official is likely to act or fail to act as a result of kinship, rank or position. It shall be unreasonable to so conclude if such officer or employee has disclosed in writing to his or her appointing authority or, if no appointing authority exists, discloses in a manner which is public in nature, the facts which would otherwise lead to such a conclusion."

    Are we getting good legal advise????

    When the BOS looked into this after it was stated as a concern at a BOS meeting what did they actually look at? What questions were asked?

  2. Oh, did anyone notice a change in the meeting from the recent past?

    No babysitting, NO Elementary school kids doing the pledge of allegiance. I know I might be a little cynical, but does anyone think it might be because we didn't have a vote on the SCHOOL last night?

    I'd really like to hear from DHB again telling me how the kids suddenly being part of the town meeting was not meant to influence voters and voter turnout for the school.

    We need to do things correctly in Templeton without the type of manipulative behavior we've seen in the past.

    1. Just for the record, some of you may remember the time I was escorted out of one of our town meetings. The real reason that happened was because I dared question the moderator's status because his wife was a teacher in our school system. I had talked to our Town Clerk, who must have informed him, and apparently he did not like it. He did cover his ass by announcing that he was married to a woman who worked for the school system. By doing that, he was alright legally, of course we do not have any conflicts by other members of the different boards ??? Hee, hee, as Pauly would say.