Framingham Mayor Aims to Wrap Up $20 Million Xmas Gift for Developers

With Councilors Ottaviani & Leombruno, arguably connected to the developers, and the City Solicitor OK on a bogus MOA, Nobscot is in peril.

This week is showdown time on the Mayor’s drive to force high density housing on the rural village of Nobscot. The Nobscot community has mounted intense and gutsy opposition to the Mayor, with:

· Sustained pressure on the City Council and the Mayor.

· 5 City Councilors on board with blocking rezoning of the controversial 30 acre J&Company parcel for high density housing in alignment with the state MBTA Communities Law.

· A well-attended standout at the Edmands/Water St intersection, with a ton of driver horn support on Saturday, December 14. See the video at:

· 1471 signatures on a petition to block the Mayor’s high density development plans.

The whole controversy is drawing increased media attention, and this newsletter has already carried 5 articles on the matter.

Framingham Parents Must Protect the Schools from the Mayor's Scheming (December 2)

High Density Nobscot Development Will Damage the Framingham Schools (November 24)

Framingham Mayor Doubles Down On High Density Nobscot Development (November 15)

The Framingham Mayor's Nobscot Folly (October 25)

Guest Column By Framingham City Councilor Adam Steiner on Nobscot Development (August 22, 2023)

There is no need to repeat prior arguments except to note that the current iteration of the plans for Nobscot now has two parts:

1. MOD 4A: 31 acres, 15 units/acre, 465 units (this is the latest J&Company parcel)

2. MOD 4B: 33 acres, 15 units/acre, 495 units (this is newly added and covers many lots which have already been developed and pose little threat to the Nobscot community)

Both could remain in the package submitted to the state for compliance with the MBTA Communities Law, or one could be removed, or both could be removed.

The obvious play here is to reject MOD 4A, as that is the J&Company option the Mayor is pushing.

Although MOD 4B may have some appeal to City Councilors, it makes sense to reject that as well and double the density at the 9/90 location to meet the state Framingham requirements for total housing units. That has been argued at length in prior articles.

The full current plan can be found at:

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/3041045/December_17__2024_MBTA_Proposal_Maps.pdf

There are two remaining important topics to cover ahead of the City Council meetings on December 17 and 19, where the fate of Nobscot will be decided:

1. The role of the Mayor’s proposed Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the J&Company developer, which the Mayor is pushing as a way to mitigate the MBTA Communities Law rezoning of the controversial MOD 4A parcel.

2. The cast of characters in this controversy, including the developers, and their unadvertised relationships with a Planning Board Member and two City Councilors, which call for recusals in votes on MOD 4A.

1. The Bogus MOA

The Memorandum of Agreement which the Mayor wants to execute with J&Company is not worth the paper it is written on because:

1. The Mayor does not have the authority to agree to the MOA. He does not have the power to override all the laws and regulations which govern residential development in the city. In an update to the MOA done today, the J&Company attorney, who remarkably works from an office in Newburyport, removed the Mayor as the signing authority, but in any case, the charter appears to require a 2/3 City Council approval for any zoning changes of this scale plus a whole process to achieve that.

2. The MOA violates the MBTA Communities Law by restricting the units in various ways, such as age of occupants and number of bedrooms.

3. If MOD 4A is voted by the City Council to be included in the submission to the state, the state will reject its inclusion if the MOA is attached. The MOA restricts development on the site much more than the MBTA Communities Law allows, so it is really crazy to try to pull a fast one on the state authorities.

4. The MOA is an agreement with J&Company, so even if the MOA withstood state scrutiny, if J&Company wished, it could sell the parcels it owns, and the new owner would not be subject to the MOA and could proceed with high density housing to the full extent allowed by the 465 units at 15 units/acre specification for the parcel.

The City Council should rapidly make clear that the MOA is dead on arrival.

It is also a matter of high concern that the City Solicitor allowed the draft MOA to be included in the City Council packet for the December 17, 2024, meeting.

Surely, she realizes that it does not pass legal muster.

It seems that, just as she acted in an unprofessional manner to argue the City Council into rejecting a sound bus solution from the School Committee:

Bad Advice From Framingham City Solicitor Torpedoes Late Bus Solution

so here she is acting in such a manner as to make some City Councilors think that the MOA has merit. She should step up and pour cold water on the MOA, and not enable another bad mistake by the City Council.

2. The Cast of Characters (lots of detail here – sorry)

We want to focus on Joe Norton, who is on the Planning Board, and Phil Ottaviani and Janet Leombruno, who are both City Councilors. We shall argue that there are connections between them and the MOD 4A developers. All 3 have voted on the future of zoning for the parcel in MOD 4A. All 3 will be involved in the same way in the upcoming meetings on December 17 and December 19.

<< Based on the information laid out below, it seems that all 3 should recuse themselves from any vote on inclusion of MOD 4A. >>

The following information is a compilation of information sent to me by members of the Nobscot community, with gaps filled in and verifications done using the state corporations database, the City Assessor’s Online Database, the city GIS Mapping Tool and the Southern Middlesex Recorded/Registered Land website.

The Details

The developer interests in the MOD 4A parcel include:

• J & Company, LLC; 60 Edmands Rd LLC (Joseph B Pasquale)

• Northside, LLC; 790 Edgell Road LLC (Robert E Foley)

• Joann Paradis Trust, Nobscot Realty Trust (uncertain beneficiaries)

• 802 Edgell Road Realty Trust (uncertain beneficiaries)

The properties involved are: 60,82,104 Edmands Rd and 462,790,802,810,824,830,874 Edgell Rd.

From sales information in the City Assessor’s Online Database, The Joann Paradis Trust/Nobscot Realty Trust acquired properties at low cost, like $100, as transfers from Nobscot Village LLC ( which is owned by Robert E. Foley) or from Amelia Foley, Robert Foley’s wife.

So, it is highly likely that the Foleys are beneficiaries of the Joann Paradis Trust/Nobscot Realty Trust, amongst others.

In short, Robert E. Foley and Joseph B. Pasquale stand out as principal beneficiaries of the MOD 4A development, where if 400 units worth $500,000 each are built at roughly $50,000 net profit each, $20 million is the final take.

Very lucrative. [Note that Robert E. Foley is the former state Deputy Treasurer.]

Other hidden beneficiaries may lie behind the Joann Paradis Trust.

Not to be forgotten in this is that with $200 million in sales from a MOD 4A development, real estate sales commissions total about $10 million, which presents a big incentive for real estate agents to be all for the deal.

Two properties are of interest in showing relationships with Joe Norton and Janet Leombruno.

810 Edgell Rd was acquired by J&Company from its homeowners on 10/25/24 for $1.2 million. This property was critical for J&Company to acquire, as it provides the necessary access to Edgell Rd for the MOD 4A parcel.

The deal was facilitated by Kathy Foran, realtor, Realty Executives Boston West who secured a new home a few miles away for the homeowners, at a cost of $950,000 with a closing on 10/31/24. Without the second deal, the first would not have happened. These are dependent deals. Kathy Foran is sister to Janet Leombruno.

<< That connects Janet Leombruno, through family/business to the MOD 4A developers >>

89 Edmands Rd is across Edmands from the MOD 4A parcel. The homeowners there had been pretty vocal about the problems resulting from poor management of the MOD 4A parcel, back in 2017, as evidenced in a 11/16/2017 Planning Board meeting.

89 Edmands Road LLC, owned by Joseph B Pasquale, acquired the property from those homeowners on 12/15/2022. On 4/24/2024, that LLC sold the property to Vincent Foley, relative of Robert E. Foley.

The real estate agent who did that deal is Joe Norton.

<< That connects Joe Norton, through business to the MOD 4A developers >>

On to Phil Ottaviani, who is connected in two different possible ways to the developers:

1. There are past family business connections with the Foleys through Southside Liquors, Inc. See: https://corp.sec.state.ma.us/CorpWeb/CorpSearch/CorpSummary.aspx?sysvalue=ivRpjGpye.JGqFrIbuuQqth.P8xRUoSAADicKL4NI1o-

2. The Joann Paradis Trust is interesting because Joann Paradis is a business associate of William Depietri, Phil’s brother-in-law. See for example: https://corp.sec.state.ma.us/CorpWeb/CorpSearch/CorpSummary.aspx?sysvalue=Pup6ji5urCferpe8m7htW.hlrjhKwLr0XMH5lAShp48-

3. Phil is also listed as a real estate agent with Realty Executives Boston West, which also lists Joe Norton and Kathy Foran.

<< That connects Phil Ottaviani, through business/family to the MOD 4A developers in multiple possible ways>>

All the above information shows that there is not a complete arm’s length relationship between the developers and Joe Norton, Janet Leombruno and Phil Ottaviani.

That must be addressed.

It seems very reasonable to call for all 3 to recuse themselves from the voting on MOD 4A to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Opinions may differ on the above, but I can report that Nobscot community members fighting the Mayor’s high density housing scheme are taking these issues seriously and have been the source of most of the information.

Already they have sent out alerts to the Boston Globe Spotlight team and filed ethics complaints with the state. The Attorney General’s office might have a special interest in the Nobscot affair due to Robert E Foley’s involvement. There have been collisions in the past which could amplify the AG’s response.

Recusals in the MOD 4A voting would go a long way to cut those actions short. No one wants state or media investigations to head Framingham’s way, nor the political fallout which would result from that.

The one mystery which remains is the intensity of the Mayor’s drive to help the developers prevail.

No one can explain that.