Conflicts of interest, constantly ignored
In a recent letter to the editor, the chair of the Greenfield Community Preservation Act Committee, Susan Worgaftik, stated that because the CPA committee is required to have representatives from the Conservation Commission, Recreation Commission, Planning Board, Housing Authority, etc. “This sometimes puts members of the committee in conflict of interest or in the appearance of conflict of interest.”
Worgaftik added that committee members “are required to recuse themselves from the discussion of that proposal,” and that “refusal means leaving the room and not participating in those deliberations, including the decisions around funding.”
However, Worgaftik, who chairs the CPA Committee submitted a letter of support for two housing projects submitted in 2026 for CPA funds — both support letters were from the group Housing Greenfield, which Worgaftik also chairs. Worgaftik submitted a letter supporting a project for $150,000 submitted by Rural Development, Inc. — an agency which is a development arm of the Franklin County Regional Housing and Redevelopment Authority, where Worgaftik sat on the board of commissioners. A second support letter from Worgaftik was written for a $100,000 project from the Greenfield Housing Authority, where Worgaftik is currently the treasurer of the GHA Board of Commissioners.
Worgaftik is one of four members of Greenfjeld’s CPA Committee who have a possible conflict of interest or lack impartiality. These members should not only abstain from all discussion of funding projects, but also not submit comments or any support, or opposition, regarding any of the other funding to avoid the appearance of partiality.
The CPA Committee has innate conflicts, so public conflicts should be aggressively enforced, and observed by all CPA members.
Ryan Whitney
Greenfield