Do Planning Commissioners Platner and Foer have a conflict of interest?

They are pushing the town to give the group they founded a $1 million freebie from the taxpayers

By Will Collette

According to the Charlestown Land Trust website, Ruth Platner and Gordon Foer are founders of the Charlestown Land Trust. Platner and Foer are also elected members of the Charlestown Planning Commission. Platner and the Commission have been promoting a million-dollar deal to use taxpayer dollars to buy the old YMCA Camp on Watchaug Pond and then GIVE it to the Land Trust.

Platner was key to the defeat of Ted Veazey’s proposed conservation development on the site and as soon as that was dead, the Charlestown Land Trust conveniently appeared on the scene to “rescue” the land from depredation.

Why hasn’t Ruth Platner – and Gordon Foer for that matter – declared their relationship to the Charlestown Land Trust? Why is Platner working so hard to line up this million-dollar deal ($946,000 to be exact, according to the latest outline of their plan) where taxpayers put up the money, but the land gets handed off to the organization that she – and Foer – founded?

Are Platner and Foer following the same ethics rules?

Regular readers of Progressive Charlestown will know how hard it is for me to say this, but my hat’s off to Council Vice-President Dan Slattery for noting that he lives near the YMCA camp and that as an “abutter,” he decided he needed to recuse himself from any Council role in the matter.

The one time he took a stand on the matter was when he stepped up to the citizen’s podium and spoke in favor of Veazey’s development as a representative of the Watchaug Heights Neighborhood Association.

Why haven’t Platner and Foer followed this example?

It is certainly unseemly, if not a violation of the Rhode Island Ethics Law, for these two elected public officials to be steering public money – almost $1 million – to an organization where they have a business association as defined under Rhode Island’s Ethics Law.

The Charlestown Land Trust is a “business” as defined under the Ethics law. The proposed deal – the state- and town-funded acquisition of the YMCA Camp for $946,000 and subsequent transfer of title to the Charlestown Land Trust – is clearly “doing business.” See definitions here.  

Under state law and the Ethics Commission regulations, it doesn’t matter that the Land Trust is a non-profit or that the “business transaction” in this instance is arguably a “good thing” (though that is definitely subject to debate). The law and regulations expressly include non-profit organizations, like the Charlestown Land Trust, as “businesses” when it comes to the conduct of public officials.

Platner said during the December 28 Planning Commission that it is better that the Charlestown Land Trust take title – even though the taxpayers are paying for the land – because they are better at managing such lands.

Foer is one of the lesser known and
more moderate Planning Commission
members. He was endorsed
by the Charlestown Citizens Alliance

In my opinion, that claim is subject to debate, too. If you look on the Land Trust’s websites, only two of their 14 major properties are accessible to the public without an advance reservation or on a scheduled tour.

Is that the plan for the YMCA Camp property? We pay for it, but can only look at it by special arrangement?

But let’s return to Ruth Platner and Gordon Foer. Perhaps it is long overdue to examine all transactions that led to land transfers to the Charlestown Land Trust from the town to see if Platner or Foer recused themselves.

The Charlestown Land Trust holds millions of dollars of Charlestown property and pays no taxes. It severely restricts public access to those lands, despite the considerable contribution Charlestown makes to the Trust by not taxing any of its closely held, private land. 

I know that the Charlestown Land Trust is a revered and respected institution in this town and that they are rarely ever criticized. But this YMCA Camp deal stinks – $367,000 in state money and maybe as much as half a million in town money to give the land to a private organization that may – or more likely may not – make the land accessible to all citizens.

One of its founders, Ruth Platner, is a driving force behind it.