Plan to abandon a vacant lot in Springfield prompts ethics review of top official

SPRINGFIELD – A small piece of land has generated a big controversy and accusations of multiple ethics concerns related to the newly elected City Council president.

The city's law department is investigating City Council President Tracye Whitfield's failure to disclose her business interests Monday, shortly before the council agreed to abandon a city-owned vacant lot and turn the land over to the small development company she, her son and two other partners own.

"There is a grave concern," said City Solicitor Stephen Buoniconti. "There may be violations of the state conflict of interest law on multiple levels."

The concerns involve Whitfield and could entangle any other city councilors who knew of her financial and family interests and failed to report it themselves, he said.

Whitfield said her failure to recuse herself from the meeting at the outset was an error made due to a lack of experience. While she has been a councilor since 2018, this is the first time she has served as president.

Whitfield's son, Jelani Bland, appeared before the City Council on behalf of JETS Property Development asking the council to abandoned what is on paper an extension of Wallace Street, but is essentially a vacant lot that is often beset by illegal dumping.

"We would like to either use it to make additional parking or an additional single-family residence," Bland said, explaining his company already owns and is building a duplex on the neighboring parcel at 23 Wisteria St.

The city's customary policy, when it abandons a small piece of land, is to divide it in half and offer the land to property owners on either side at no cost or a nominal fee. The owners, if they accept it, would then have to pay taxes on it.

About 11 minutes into the hearing on Bland's request, City Councilor Michael Fenton, who served as council president last year, asked Whitfield if she planned to continue to preside over the hearing.

"I hate to ask, but I'm just uncomfortable. I feel like I have to ask if you intend to recuse from any part of this discussion?" he asked.

Whitfield responded, "Absolutely." Fenton asked her when she planned to do so, and explained she should have left before the hearing began.

Whitfield then turned the meeting over to City Councilor Jose Delgado, who is vice president, and left the room. Later, she said her understanding was she could continue to run the meeting but abstain from voting.

"I wasn't trying to do anything illegal. It was an honest mistake and we learn from our mistakes," she said in a later interview. "I will rectify and correct it and be open and transparent."

At about 10 p.m. Monday, an hour or so after the meeting ended, Whitfield said she sent a letter to the city's law department admitting her error and asking for guidance. She contacted the state Ethics Commission Tuesday and wrote a letter to her 12 fellow councilors explaining the steps she was taking "out of an abundance of caution."

Buoniconti, who is investigating the issue, said one of the concerns is that when Whitfield left the meeting, she had not revealed her financial interests in the property or disclosed that she is Bland's mother.

While some council members were aware of it, several others said they did not know about it when they voted in favor of the petition.

Whitfield said the entire council could use ethics training, but several other members said they receive it every year. Last fall, Buoniconti sent a memo to the City Council reminding members they should be "exceedingly cautious" about participating in any matters involving the city and personal business interests.

Also being examined is how much influence Whitfield used in her position as a city councilor when her son and their company petitioned the city last fall to change the zoning of the abutting property at 23 Wisteria St. from single-family to multi-family so the duplex could be constructed, Buoniconti said.

"These are the kind of votes that shake the people's trust in the body," he said.

During the meeting, Fenton said that not only was he concerned Whitfield did not recuse herself, but questioned the transaction itself for multiple reasons. He proposed sending the issue to a council subcommittee for further discussion and research. That motion failed in a 10-2 vote, with only Fenton and Councilor Melvin Edwards voting in favor.

The decision to have the city abandon the parcel was approved in the same 10-2 ballots.

While Fenton said he is not opposed to abandoning the "paper" street, he questioned if it was proper to turn it over to the two abutters at no cost, when the roughly 6,000-square-foot property is a buildable lot.

"Clearly it has economic value and it should be put out to auction," he said.

Typically, Springfield holds auctions periodically to sell smaller parcels of land it acquires, including through non-payment of taxes, but does not need. It is usually small parcels no one bids on and have little value to anyone but an abutter that are offered to the adjacent property owners.

Fenton also aired concerns that the council did not have any evidence of neighborhood support for the proposal. City officials did say residents were notified of the hearing.

Other councilors said they were not concerned about having the city abandon the street. They noted that other steps lie ahead before the property would be turned over and pointed to a need for housing.

"It seems to me we are in dire need of housing," said City Councilor Justin Hurst. "It also seems to me to the extent that we can increase our tax base to offset the tax increases on a yearly basis, that we ought to do it. You are eliminating a blighted area which can be an eyesore."

Read the original article on MassLive . Add MassLive as a Preferred Source by clicking here .