Skip to content

Compliance Building

Doug Cornelius on compliance for private equity real estate

Menu
  • Home
  • About
    • About
    • About Doug
    • About This Website
    • Why I Blog
    • Speaking Engagements
    • Contact
    • Publications
  • Archives
    • Topic Archive
    • Book Reviews
    • Most Popular
  • Subscribe
  • Disclaimers
    • Disclaimers
    • Policies and Procedures
    • Use of Site Content
    • Comments
    • FTC Disclosure
Menu

Norfolk Developer Accused Of Ethics Breach

Posted on November 25, 2008 by Doug Cornelius
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Michele Morgan Bolton of the Boston Globe reports that Jack Scott, president of Pine Creek Development Corp., was accused last week of violating state law by allegedly offering a free week at his Pennsylvania cabin to the chairman of the town’s Conservation Commission while he had an application before the board: Developer Accused of Ethics Breach.

According to the Massachusetts State Ethics Commission’s press release:

The Ethics Commission’s Enforcement Division, in an Order to Show Cause issued on November 18, 2008, alleges that Norfolk property developer Jack Scott violated sections 2(a) and 3(a) of G.L. c. 268A, the state’s conflict of interest law, by offering a free week at his Pennsylvania cabin to the chairman of the Norfolk Conservation Commission (“ConCom”) while Scott had an application pending before the ConCom.

A public hearing will be scheduled within 90 days.

According to the Order to Show Cause, in May 2006, Scott filed an application with the ConCom to build a single-family home on Applewood Road. On May 12, 2006, while his application was pending, Scott sent an e-mail to the ConCom chairman offering a week’s stay at his cabin. A week’s stay at the cabin cost an estimated $700. The OTSC alleges that, “Scott offered the weeklong cabin stay to the ConCom chair to facilitate and/or reward the ConCom chair for the ConCom’s approval” of his application. The ConCom chairman did not accept Scott’s offer.

Section 2(a) of G.L. c. 268A, the conflict of interest law, in relevant part, prohibits anyone from corruptly offering anything of value to a municipal employee with intent to influence any official act or act within his official responsibility. Section 3(a) prohibits anyone, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, from directly or indirectly offering anything of substantial value to any municipal employee for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such an employee.

The Boston Globe story

Share this:

  • Print (Opens in new window) Print
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Search for Stuff

Recent Stories

  • The Performance of the SEC in 2025
  • More on the Downsizing of the SEC
  • SEC Enforcement Results for FY 2025
  • Proposed Fundamental Reforms to AML Programs
  • Is It a Truck or a Security?
  • The One with Low IQ from Pet IQ
  • The Downsizing of the SEC
  • When “Today” Is Not all of “Today”
  • Compliance Bricks and Mortar for March 27
  • The One Where Theory Meets Reality

Fight Cancer

Please support my Pan-Mass Challenge
Make a donation to fight cancer. donate.pmc.org/DC0176
pan-mass challenge badge

I am a lawyer, but I am not your lawyer. Since I’m a lawyer, this website may be considered attorney advertising under the ethical rules of certain jurisdictions. Please read my disclaimers page before taking any action. And then, don't take any action based on what I wrote.

Creative Commons logo with the text 'Some Rights Reserved' and three symbols representing attribution, non-commercial use, and share alike.

Compliance Building - by Doug Cornelius is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.