Some RTM members want more oversight of Greenwich school projects

GREENWICH — When they withdrew a motion in January calling for the formation of a building committee to oversee the Cardinal Stadium project at Greenwich High School, advocates promised they would be back.

Now, those supporters from District 9 plan to propose a new ordinance Monday to the full Representative Town Meeting that would require a building committee to supervise all major school construction projects.

“If the federal or state government wants oversight over the money they give to a school district, why wouldn’t Greenwich taxpayers want that same oversight for their tax dollars?” said Abbe Large, a member of District 9 and an advocate for building committees.

They had originally sought a nonbinding “sense of the meeting resolution” that would have been specifically for the stadium project.

But this new proposal seeks a widerreaching ordinance that would amend town code and change the way school projects are done. Building committees are formed only when state or federal reimbursement money is used for a project, such as with the recent New Lebanon School. This ordinance would also require a building committee when the Planning and Zoning Commission grants municipal improvement status to a project.

Advocates of the building committee for the stadium project said that more oversight is needed on town capital spending. But they withdrew the motion when it “really evolved into a discussion about the stadium, which is not what we really intended,” District 9 Chair Betsey Frumin said.

“We wanted to go for a discussion about building committees for school projects,” she said. “That was our fault and we decided to go right for the ordinance change.”

“If the federal or state government wants oversight over the money they give to a school district, why wouldn’t Greenwich taxpayers want that same oversight for their tax dollars?” Abbe Large, member of District 9

School board disagrees

The majority of the Board of Education did not support the sense of the meeting resolution, and its chair, Peter Bernstein, spoke out about the proposed ordinance.

“The Board of Education has not formally taken up this item and we have not been invited to be a party to the discussions,” said Bernstein, who also said “this feels like it is being rushed.”

He added, “I personally don’t understand the reluctance to only apply this to school projects and not include major town construction projects. If the proponents believe that building

committee provides increased accountability, good governance and transparency, then town projects would certainly benefit from building committees as well.”

The ordinance would apply only to school projects, because the town code in question only mentions school projects, Large said. Also, the mechanisms in place with the Department of Public Works on town projects serve as the kind of checks and balances that are needed, she said.

“We’re not attacking the Board of Education,” Large said. “We’re looking at the code. According to the town attorneys, the code doesn’t make sense about when committees are required. … This is being done to provide more clarification to the town code.”

No committee endorsement

The RTM’s Education Committee discussed the proposed ordinance Monday but did not endorse it. In a vote of four in favor and eight against, the ordinance will not get the committee’s recommendation when it goes before the full RTM on Monday night.

The Education Committee had reservations over the sense of the meeting resolution in January as well, with members wanting clarification from the town’s legal department and expressing concern that forming a building committee could have delayed new bleachers and other improvements at Cardinal Stadium.

Large said she understood there were concerns about “unintended consequences” but said, “I think we’ve seen unintended consequences of not having oversight on school building projects. … I think that comes from having different construction at different times with different superintendents with different boards. There’s a huge lack of coordination and continuity for one project.”

According to Frumin, the RTM’s Legislative and Rules, Public Works and Land Use Committees support the proposal. On Tuesday night, the RTM’s Parks and Recreation Committee, however, did not vote to support it.

It will be introduced as a “first read item” at the meeting and no vote will be taken. It will instead be discussed with a vote possible at the RTM’s April 19 meeting.

The next RTM meeting is scheduled to begin at 8 p.m. Monday on Zoom. A sign-up form is posted at www.greenwichct.gov/RTM for members of the public who want to speak at the meeting.