The Ringer Makes an Appearance.
By Jim Conley • Mar 24th, 2008 • Email This Post to a Friend •
Print This Post
• Email this author
Looks like Brookline Police Chief Daniel O’Leary’s ringer [see previous post] on the police policy review panel — Attorney Douglas Louison — will appear before the selectmen, to disclose his financial interest in representing Brookline police officers.
The reason for this is because the Massachusetts Ethics Law requires “special municipal employees” to disclose any potential conflict of interest to the appointing authority (in this case the Selectmen). The selectmen will can decide that Louison can be objective in forming policy even though he represents officers who will be affected by the policies established by the panel.
I don’t see how that can happen; but this is Brookline town government, where self interest is the name of the game.
Jim Conley is publisher of On Brookline.
Email this author | All posts by Jim Conley
Consider that three of the Selectmen are attorneys, two of them with active law practices centered in Brookline (who may actually compete with each other for legal business). Perhaps these two Selectmen, one of whom is running for reelection this May (with the other perhaps so considering in May of 2009), may be relucant to give up public elective office in Brookline because doing so just might impact economically upon their law practices; their clients may perceive that they, serving as Selectmen, provide an edge in legal matters that may relate to the Town, directly or indirectly.
Attorney Louison, I understands, resides in Brookline and may well have a thriving practice in Boston and its environs. Maybe he has established a specialty of representing police officers in employment and other claims that may generate significant legal fees for him and his law firm. Good luck to him. But he is serving as a volunteer without the same accountability that exists for an elected official, who may be voted out of office. (We’ll see what happens at this May’s elections.) If there is even a mere appearance of a possible conflict of interest on Louison’s part, why would he wish to continue to serve on this panel of experts? Are there economic incentives for continuing to so serve? Even if he is given a “pass” by the Selectmen, some other members of the panel may have concern with Louison’s continuation on the panel. Surely some not insignificant segment of Brookline residents may have doubts. Perhaps the honorable thing for Louison to do is to voluntarily withdraw.
Perhaps Selectman Allen should recuse himself on this matter. After all, his brother, a Lieutenant on BPD as well as an attorney, is listed “Of Counsel” to Selectman Allen’s law firm in the Village. I would assume that neither Selectman Allen nor his brother would turn away legal business involving a member of BPD (or his/her family) that does not involve a possible conflict of interest. (I do not know what limits are placed upon Selectman Allen’s brother by BPD rules and regulations regarding his law practice while serving in a full time position of the BPD.) So in a sense, Selectman Allen may be competing with attorney Louison for such legal business. (I assume that it would be inappropriate for either Selectman Allen or his brother to formally (or even informally) “refer” a matter involving a BPD officer client that may involve a possible conflict of interest to another attorney.)