Springfield City Council President Tracye Whitfield spoke at city hall about the issue of not immediately recusing herself while presiding over a Monday meeting when her son requested that a city-owned parcel of land be abandoned for other use.
Photo credit: Douglas Hook/The Republican
SPRINGFIELD — The Springfield City Council called a special meeting to rescind a vote, after Springfield City Council President Tracye Whitfield failed to recuse herself from deliberation of a matter that she had financial and familial connections to.
At the council’s Feb. 2 meeting, Whitfield’s son, Jelani Bland, came before the council to request a piece of land that is part of Wallace Street on maps, but is essentially a vacant lot, be discontinued.
He explained that his company, JETS Property Development, owns an abutting property at 23 Wisteria Lane and is interested in building on the land. Whitfield is listed as a resident agent and manager of the company.
Whitfield remained at the podium in her capacity as council president for nine minutes of deliberation on the matter before Fenton asked her if she was planning to recuse herself. Whitfield responded, “Oh, do I recuse now? Do I step down now?” She later said, “This is a learning experience for me. I wish you had said something sooner.”
After the meeting, Whitfield contacted the state Ethics Commission and City Solicitor Stephen Buoniconti for guidance on the incident. In an opinion issued on Feb. 5, he said that Whitfield violated the state law that regulates the conduct of public officials and employees.
Specifically, he said the actions that violate the statute included not recusing herself at the start of deliberation, failing to disclose Bland was her son and business partner, and that she had a financial interest in the matter before the council, and failing to file those disclosures with the city clerk’s office.
Buoniconti went on to say that during Planning Board meetings in 2024 about a zone change for 23 Wisteria Lane, Whitfield declared herself to be a city councilor and said the zone change would be a positive improvement for the city. She did not disclose that she had financial and familial interests in the matter.
The solicitor recommended the council rescind its vote to discontinue the section of Wallace Street because it was “tainted and rife with conflict-of-interest violations.” He referred the matter to the Massachusetts Ethics Commission. Whitfield had contacted the Ethics Board about the matter the day after the council’s meeting.
Photo credit: Douglas Hook/The Republican
On Feb. 6, seven of the 13 city councilors — Victor Davila, Michael Fenton, Kateri Walsh, Melvin Edwards, Brian Santaniello, Gerry Martin and Jose Delgado — hosted a press conference in the council chambers. While Councilor Maria Perez was ill and unable to attend, Davila said she was “here in spirit with us and in full support.” Davila briefly explained the issue and said the seven councilors had signed a petition to call a special council meeting to rescind the vote taken on Feb. 2. That meeting was scheduled for Feb. 13.
Davila said, “Rescinding the vote is not only the wise thing to do, as advised by the Law Department, but is also the right thing to do. We must ensure public trust in the process is open, fair and free of undue influence.” He went on to announce that he would personally request the Law Department to review all the city’s transactions involving Whitfield and JETS Development “out of an abundance of caution.”
Fenton agreed with his colleague. He said, “Transparency and maintaining the public trust is of the utmost importance to the integrity of city government and the integrity of the City Council.” He described rescinding the vote as “corrective action.”
“I think it’s a responsibility to address any mistakes so that the public can have confidence that it’s a fair and transparent procedure,” said Walsh. “It’s a difficult thing to be doing, but I think it’s the right step.”
Whitfield hosted her own press conference in the chambers that morning. “I want to take full responsibility and publicly acknowledge my mistake in not recusing myself immediately from discussion related to the discontinuance of a city street,” she said. “Public service is a privilege, and I take seriously the responsibility that comes with serving as a public official.” She said she had “misunderstood the rules” regarding conflicts of interest and thought she was supposed to recuse herself for the vote only, and not the deliberation. “While this was not intentional; it was my responsibility, and I fully own that,” Whitfield said.
Whitfield also commented on bidding on two properties at a recent public auction. She said that she was at the proceedings “in full public view,” along with Bland and is “proud that we are investing in our hometown.” She said, “I acknowledge that I should have been more mindful of how these matter could be perceived.” She did not address her participation in the Planning Board meetings Buoniconti referred to.
Moving forward, Whitfield announced that she will meet with the City Council legal counsel before every meeting to discuss each item to ensure there are no other conflicts. She also said she would undertake more ethics training.
“Public service is real, on-the-job learning and while leaders do make mistakes, what matters is how we respond,” she said. She apologized for the mistake and thanked her colleagues and Springfield residents for their dedication to transparency. She said she would “endorse” the decision of the council regarding the rescinding of the vote.
You must be logged in to post a comment.