School, Town Officials Rebut Criticism of Aitken Expansion
Seekonk School Superintendent Rich Drolet and Selectmen Chairman Justin Sullivan have responded to criticism from Seekonk Concerned Citizens regarding the Aitken Elementary School expansion project.
The 10 classroom addition was completed last June at a cost of $11 million.
Voters approved the funding at the May 2019 Spring Town Meeting. The school committee formed an ad hoc building committee to oversee the project.
“The Aitken School expansion project was flawed from the beginning and continues to violate many aspects of Mass General Law, open meeting law and Seekonk By-Laws,” wrote David Saad, a representative of the group.
Saad said the SCC requested an “administrative investigation” through a state agency into the actions taken by the school committee chair, the school committee, and Drolet “as they hijacked a project that was voted on to be the responsibility of the Board of Selectmen.”
The ad hoc committee included David Viera from the Board of Selectmen, school committee members Noah Escaler and Kim Sluter, and Greg Smolley, the school architect project manager from DRA (Drummey Rosanne Anderson), the firm which was hired for completing a study of the issue of overcrowding in Seekonk schools. Among several options and recommendations, the decision was made to pursue a permanent addition to the Aitken School to replace leased modular classrooms. DRA was later awarded the contract for architectural design for the Aitken expansion.
“Nothing unethical was done,” Drolet said on May 13. “There were no violations. The RFQ (request for quotation) process for OPM (Office of the Project Manager) and Design Services is a public process.”
According to Drolet, 26 architectural design companies requested the bid documents. Five architectural and design companies proposed on the project. Two out of those five companies who bid were disqualified since they did not meet the RFQ requirements.
“Ultimately, three companies were interviewed and ranked against the selection criteria outlined in the issued RFQ. DRA was then chosen out of the final three companies,” Drolet noted. “The firm’s price proposal was $498,500.”
The SCC claimed the way the expansion project “was handled and the presentation by the school committee chair (Sluter)” at the town meeting “was serious misrepresentation and everyone including the selectmen went along with it. This multi-million dollar project is costing Seekonk taxpayers through free cash and debt exclusions as borrowing effects the tax bills in incremental amounts.”
Sullivan said the allegations made by SCC were taken seriously.
“After an extensive investigation that was reviewed by Town Counsel upon completion, only one allegation was determined to be in violation of MGL,” Sullivan wrote Wednesday. “The allegations regarding by-law violations were examined as well. There were no violations here. The School Committee is within its right to establish an ad hoc committee and select who it wants on the committee. This is no different than the Board of Selectmen establishing an ad hoc building committee for a structure in Town to ultimately be presented to residents at Town Meeting for consideration of appropriation.”
“All findings from the investigation were shared with the Superintendent and both the former and current Chair of the School Committee,” Sullivan continued. “There were subsequent follow up discussions regarding the findings and how to improve transparency and process in the future.”
Some members of the Board of Selectmen had questioned the need for the expansion due to lower than anticipated enrollment figures for the current school year.
Drolet noted enrollment dropped in many other school districts due to Covid. Many parents and guardians opted to either home-school their children or sought alternative school placements.
“Our enrollment went back up by 39 students this year, and we expect it to continue to rise,” Drolet said.
Sullivan insists the BOS and the School Department are getting along well.
“While any working relationship is bound to have bumps in the road from time to time there is no reason to believe our relationship will change. In fact, it will serve to make our working relationship healthier,” Sullivan added.
Comments
1 comment on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
DoreenTaylor1963
The only problem with this article is the political remarks made by our beloved leaders. "All finds from the investigation....... says Chairman Sullivan. Yet he refused Concerned Citizens a placement on a public agenda, so it was not shared with the community. outright from the beginning.
“After an extensive investigation that was reviewed by Town Counsel upon completion, only one allegation was determined to be in violation of MGL,” Sullivan wrote Wednesday. Ha! What was the violation of MGL? It has never been disclosed to anyone.
“Ultimately, three companies were interviewed and ranked against the selection criteria outlined in the issued RFQ. DRA was then chosen out of the final three companies,” Drolet noted. “The firm’s price proposal was $498,500.” Coming from a company involved with the original plan knowing they participated in the "independent" adhoc commitee and knowing the School Community wants, is anyone really surprised? The proposal is one factor, checking the payments is another. Check the payments!
“Nothing unethical was done,” Drolet said on May 13. “There were no violations. The RFQ (request for quotation) process for OPM (Office of the Project Manager) and Design Services is a public process.” All done "prior" to Town Meeting vote of approval.
Town officials have once again pitched the usual POLITICAL bologna with the expectation that we are all supposed to nod our heads and say, yes of course! Superintendent Drolet says there were no violations. Chairman Sullivan says there was one and it was MGL-Massachusetts General Law.
The need for expansion is not even the issue with these politicians. It is the process they and the nonsense they pulled to get away with a very expensive project that is about $1 million dollars per additional classroom. There are no enrollment numbers to support that expense with or without Covid being an excuse.
“While any working relationship is bound to have bumps in the road from time to time there is no reason to believe our relationship will change. In fact, it will serve to make our working relationship healthier,” Sullivan added. This adds up to more bologna and it is knee deep. Why is Chairman Sullivan making this about "their" relationship when they need to be accountable to the taxpayers for spending OUR MONEY as they choose without full disclosure of process and final cost??
We have not been given a final accounting of the $11,500,000 we approved for the SELECTMEN to use to "Expand" Aitken School not the School Committee to rebuild it. Taxpayers are seeing an increase to their tax bills for a short-term loan. Wait until the entire project is borrowed for the long-term. No matter what the politicians say our tax bills will see another hike.
Thursday, May 19, 2022 Report this