Framingham City Councilors Ottaviani & Leombruno Should Get Ethics Commission Clearance on Nobscot

On Wednesday, February 18, 2026, there will be a meeting of the City Council Planning and Zoning Subcommittee, in which rezoning of the controversial Edmands/Edgell parcel in Nobscot will be discussed. As is well known, the neighborhood has been fighting this high density development for years, with this new discussion signaling the 4th attempt by the developer to win the rezoning battle.

The matter has been covered in multiple prior articles:

J&Co 3rd Attempt at Over Development of Framingham's Nobscot Village (Jul 8, 2025)

Framingham Councilor King Deftly Blocks Victory for Nobscot Community (Dec 20, 2024)

High Density Nobscot Development Will Damage the Framingham Schools (Nov 24, 2024)

Framingham Mayor Doubles Down On High Density Nobscot Development (Nov 15, 2024)

The Framingham Mayor's Nobscot Folly (Oct 25, 2024)

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

One other article focused on ethical issues, and called for City Councilors Ottaviani & Leombruno to recuse themselves from discussion and votes on the Nobscot rezoning issue:

Framingham Mayor Aims to Wrap Up $20 Million Xmas Gift for Developers (Dec 16, 2024)

There were no subsequent recusals, although it seemed clear that the State Ethics Commission should have at least been asked for an opinion on the issue.

That article touched a nerve, and on December 20, 2024, I received a Cease & Desist letter from an attorney representing Realty Executives Boston West, claiming that the article libeled its partners/realtors: Phil Ottaviani, Kathy Foran and Joe Norton (former member of the Planning Board), and demanding that I withdraw the article and apologize.

I hired a First Amendment attorney and beat back the attack, based on the fact that I was simply reporting facts and telling the truth.

The recusal issue remains critically important, as the rezoning battle heats up again, so with the hope that I will not again come under legal assault by the parties involved, I sent this email to City Councilor Christine Long, Chair of the Planning & Zoning Subcommittee:

From: Geoffrey Epstein <geoffreynepstein@gmail.com>

Date: Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 1:06 PM

Subject: Ethical conflict for 2/18 meeting

To: Christine A. Long <clong@framinghamma.gov>

Cc: Philip R. Ottaviani <pottaviani@framinghamma.gov>, Janet Leombruno <jleombruno@framinghamma.gov>

Hi Christine,

I would like to raise a conflict-of-interest concern under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 268A which relates to the 2/18/26 planned meeting of the Planning & Zoning Subcommittee.

The rezoning before the Planning & Zoning Subcommittee concerns a specific 30-acre parcel and a specific developer: Edmands/Edgell and J&Co. The projected value of the development is approximately $200 million, with potential brokerage commissions estimated at roughly $10 million.

It appears that both Phil Ottaviani and Janet Leombruno will have a conflict with the state ethics laws if they engage in discussion or votes on the rezoning proposal for the Edmands/Edgell parcel.

Specifics for Janet Leombruno

Janet has an immediate family member — a sister, Kathy Foran — who is a part owner of Realty Executives Boston West. That brokerage has previously represented the developer in related transactions, including the sale of adjacent property and assistance in assembling a key access parcel necessary for this development.

Under Chapter 268A, Section 19, a municipal official may not participate in a matter in which an immediate family member has a direct or reasonably foreseeable financial interest. Immediate family under the statute includes siblings.

Given the brokerage’s prior involvement with this developer and the scale of potential commissions tied to this rezoning, there appears to be at minimum a reasonably foreseeable possibility of financial benefit to the immediate family member.

Chapter 268A, Section 23 further requires officials to avoid acting in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that they could be improperly influenced.

I respectfully request that the Council seek written guidance from the State Ethics Commission to ensure full compliance with Chapter 268A and to protect the integrity of this proceeding.

Specifics for Phil Ottaviani

Phil Ottaviani works for Realty Executives Boston West, a brokerage that has had prior business dealings with the developer involved in this project.

In addition, there is a documented history of prior financial transactions between the Councilor and the developer. Specifically, when a property adjacent to or within the development parcel went into foreclosure, Phil Ottaviani purchased that property at auction and subsequently transferred it to a realty trust controlled by the developer.

There has also been a prior business relationship between the families, including a jointly operated liquor store owned and managed by their spouses for approximately ten years.

Under Chapter 268A, Section 19, a municipal official may not participate in a particular matter in which he, or a business organization in which he is employed, has a direct or reasonably foreseeable financial interest. The projected commission pool associated with a development of this size could be substantial — potentially in the range of several million dollars — and the Councilor’s employer is a brokerage firm operating in this market and with prior dealings involving this developer.

Chapter 268A, Section 23 further provides that a public official may not act in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to conclude that he could be improperly influenced by a private party.

Given:

• The prior property transaction involving foreclosure and transfer,
• The historical business relationship between the families,
• The Councilor’s employment with a brokerage that has worked with this developer, and
• The scale of potential brokerage revenue associated with the rezoning,

there appears to be, at minimum, a reasonable question as to whether a financial interest may be reasonably foreseeable, or whether an appearance concern exists under Section 23.

I respectfully request that the Councilor seek formal written guidance from the State Ethics Commission and disclose any relevant financial relationships so that the Council and the public can be assured that the requirements of Chapter 268A are fully satisfied.

These requests are made to ensure transparency and public confidence, not to suggest wrongdoing.

It would seem prudent to postpone any meetings until these ethical questions are resolved.

Geoff Epstein

8 Stalker Ln

I received a reply from Christine Long, who indicated her plan to continue with the meeting, and ask the City Solicitor for an opinion, but leave it up to the City Councilors Ottaviani and Leombruno to take whatever action they see fit.

The gold standard for ethical advice is the State Ethics Commission. Its staff specializes in providing advice to elected officials to help clarify situations where conflicts might arise, such as this one.

The City Solicitor has little experience or specific expertise in this critical area, and should not be the source for City Council guidance on recusal issues.

It would be a very simple matter for City Councilors Ottaviani and Leombruno to explain the full facts of the situation to the State Ethics Commission lawyers and get a written opinion, based on those facts, for the community to see.

If the State Ethics Commission gives the green light, then due ethical diligence will have been done.

If the Nobscot rezoning debate continues without this key clarification on possible ethical conflicts, a great disservice will be done not only to the Nobscot Community, but to the entire Framingham community. Trust in government will diminish.

Personal Note

I have 10 years of service on School Committees in 2 cities, with multiple trainings on state ethics law and practice. I have also observed many situations where recusals are appropriate and done.

It is very obvious to me that recusal is essential for Phil Ottaviani and Janet Leombruno, given the fact situation, including the durable personal and/or business relationships with the developer, and the huge broker fees which would be generated by sales from the development, if it is approved. This is a classic recusal situation.

If I were Phil or Janet, I would recuse myself immediately and not wait for advice from the Ethics Commission.