A proposal to freeze property taxes for Chelsea’s income-eligible senior homeowners died in a council subcommittee on June 16 on a vote of 1 to 1 to 1, with the deciding councillor declining to vote because the City Solicitor’s office had flagged a potential conflict of interest. Nobody on the record said what the conflict was.
The proposal
Councillor Giovanni Recupero’s Order 2601 is a home rule petition, which is how a Massachusetts city asks the Legislature for a power it does not have. This one would exempt income-eligible seniors who own and occupy their homes from property tax increases, so that a retiree on a fixed income is not taxed out of a house whose assessed value keeps climbing. Several communities have similar special acts. At the subcommittee Recupero offered two amendments, one clarifying that the exemption covers tax increases rather than the whole bill, and one adding a five-year residency requirement.
The vote
The Aging and Veterans subcommittee had three members present. Councillor Calvin Brown voted in favor. Councillor Leo Robinson, according to the minutes, “expressed concerns about a potential conflict of interest as cited by the City Solicitor’s office, and indicated he would not be comfortable voting on the proposed petition for that reason.” He voted present. The third member voted no. A 1-1-1 tie is an unfavorable recommendation, and that is how it went back to the full council on June 22.
Recupero, the minutes say, “dismissed concerns about a conflict of interest, and noted his intent to continue to move the proposal forward by referring it back to the full City Council.”
The question nobody answered
A conflict of interest under the state ethics law, chapter 268A, arises when a public official acts on a matter in which he or an immediate family member has a financial interest. A councillor who is himself a senior homeowner, or whose parent is, would have exactly that interest in a senior tax freeze. So would most of the council, which is why the law lets an official participate after disclosing the interest in writing when the matter affects a large class of people the same way. If the Solicitor’s advice was that councillors who would qualify should not vote, the petition cannot pass, because too many of them would qualify. If the advice was narrower, the subcommittee did not say so.
The full council has not taken up the petition since June. Recupero, who represents District 6 and has fought the administration on records and legal advice all year, has said he will bring it back. What the conflict was has never been stated on the record by Recupero, by Robinson or by the Solicitor’s office.