Springfield Council rescinds Wallace Street discontinuance after solicitor memorandum raises ethics concerns

The Springfield City Council voted Feb. 13 to rescind its Feb. 2 decision to discontinue a 6,000-square-foot parcel at the corner of Wallace and Wisteria streets after a city solicitor's memorandum raised conflict-of-interest concerns involving Council President Whitfield.

Councilor Davila, who led the call for rescission, said the solicitor's memorandum described "a plethora of conflict-of-interest violations, undue influence on the planning board and several department heads" and recounted an alleged threat by the president to audit the Old Hill Neighborhood Council. "The process is now tainted. I have lost faith in the city council president's ability to lead this body," Davila said, and asked that President Whitfield step down. He added that if Whitfield does not resign he will seek a vote of no confidence at the next regular meeting.

Other council members urged different responses. "We're not the ethics commission," Councilor Martin said, urging colleagues not to act as "judge, jury and executioner" at the special meeting. Councilor Perez described the new information as "embarrassing" and recommended forming a special committee to review the matter and return findings to the full council.

City Solicitor Banakani told the Council that a successful motion to rescind would "nullify the entire action by the city council, and it really starts the process all over again." He said the parcel is a buildable lot of "substantial value," and explained that, administratively, the city would likely ensure the lot meets code and then put it up for sale to the highest bidder for an appropriate community use.

Councilor Golan said a no-confidence vote would be premature and said the Council should allow the state ethics commission to complete its review. After debate, the clerk called the roll: Santanello, Martin, Perez, Brown, Golan, Walsh, Hurst, Davila, Fenton, Edwards and Delgado voted yes; Klick Bruce and Whitfield were absent. The clerk announced the motion passed by a sufficient margin.

The rescission returns the matter to its pre-Feb. 2 status, which the solicitor said restarts the administrative process for the parcel. Councilors who urged review said they expect further action from the ethics commission and proposed follow-up by a special committee or in a future meeting; Councilor Davila said he may pursue a formal no-confidence vote if Whitfield does not resign.

The Council adjourned and announced its next hearings meeting for Feb. 20 at 6:30 p.m.