RTM committee opposes increased stadium oversight
Full legislative vote on building panel set for next week
GREENWICH — Members of a Representative Town Meeting committee this week declined to endorse a resolution calling for greater oversight for the ongoing stadium improvements at Greenwich High School.
The full RTM is expected to vote on a resolution, which would call for the creation of a building committee to run the project, on Jan. 19.
Several Education Committee members on Monday said they wanted to wait until the town received an opinion from its legal department before supporting a resolution; others worried that insisting on a building committee for a project already underway could delay work on the bleachers, potentially rendering them unusable for graduation in June.
“I don’t know if it’s worth it for this particular project at this particular juncture because it will definitely get delayed,” Education Committee Alternate Janet McMahon said.
Three members voted to endorse a resolution while seven voted against with two abstentions. The resolution will still be introduced next week for a vote by the full RTM. If passed, the resolution would express the opinion of the RTM. It would not compel the school board to create a building committee.
The GHS stadium improvements are being done in multiple phases. Phase 1A includes new
bleachers on the home side of the stadium as well as a new press box with an elevator, a new team room and a new concession stand. Phase 1B is to include a new ticket kiosk and improved parking accessibility for people with disabilities.
Phase 2 of the project is to include road work to create a new access road connected to East Putnam Avenue. That part of the project has not received town approvals yet and is still under development.
The home bleachers have already been demolished and the new ones have been fabricated off-site. All the needed town approvals have been given for 1A and the final approvals are anticipated for Phase 1B.
Board of Education member Joe Kelly, who has been overseeing this project for the school board, said he expects the town
Planning and Zoning Commission to grant final approval for Phase 1B at its meeting Jan. 20, which would allow for a contractor to be hired.
On Tuesday, town Planning and Zoning Director Katie DeLuca confirmed the item will be on the commission’s agenda for Jan. 20.
Building committees are convened to oversee most large construction projects. They typically consist of town officials and residents, often industry professionals, who oversee all aspects of a project from start to finish. The school board, which is receiving no state money for the stadium project and thus is not mandated to form a committee, has repeatedly said one is not necessary for the work currently underway.
School board members have left the door open for creating a committee for Phase 2, which is expected to involve more complicated work.
“Certainly it doesn’t make sense for the first phase, which is well on its way to completion,” Board of Education Chair Peter Bernstein said this week. “If this is an issue about understanding where the project is, we would be happy to provide an update report to the relevant RTM committees. All they need to do is ask. To date, none have done so.”
Kelly said his main focus is making sure the often-delayed project gets done.
“I have no opinion on whether we have a building committee or not,” Kelly said. “It makes no difference to me. As long as we’re moving forward on a project that in my opinion, both professional and personal, was stuck in the mud and needed a little push forward. … It looks like we’re going to get it done in June if there are no obstacles.”
First Selectman Fred Camillo said he personally endorses the idea of a building committee but is waiting for more information.
“I’ve always believed in building committees,” Camillo said. “I know they have to be specific and have to be tightly developed and written so they stay on task. But I believe it promotes transparency and we have a great pool of talent here in town, people with great skill sets who can address these things.”
The considered a motion to postpone a vote on the resolution until after the legal opinion was in but it did not have enough support to be heard.
Education Committee members who favor creating a building committee said it is necessary to ensure proper oversight and transparency about the project.
“Our biggest concern is accountability,” said committee member Abbe Large. “We want to make sure the project gets managed correctly and everyone is crossing their T’s and dotting their I’s.”
There have been multiple public meetings about the project by the town Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of Estimate and Taxation, which along with the RTM approved funding for the project.
Other committee members questioned why this request was being made so late in the process. There have been multiple public meetings about the project held by the town Planning and Zoning Commission and Board of Estimate and Taxation, which along with the RTM approved funding for the project.
Some questioned if the proposal was an effort to expand the scope of the project beyond what the school board had approved.
“There is talk of people wanting to expand this project and include the visitor bleachers” in Phase 1A, Education Committee member Barbara O’Neill, a former chair of the Board of Education, said. “You have to be very careful about who this committee is going to answer to. Are you taking authority away from the Board of Ed? And why are we doing this now after all this public debate and public discussion? This is a last minute call for a building committee. What is the underlying motive? I hope it’s not to expand this project.”