Police Station: Is the Cover Up Worse than the Crime?

The police station project first came before the Capital Improvement Planning Committee (CIPC) this year on Mar 20th.  This was nearly 6 months late.  The Capital Planning Bylaw requires that:

 “All officers, boards and committees, including the Selectmen… shall by Oct 1st of each year, give to the Committee…information concerning all anticipated projects requiring Town Meeting action for the next six years.”

 
First, Town Facilities Director, Jim Kelly, and BOS member, Bob Haarde, have stated that they had no prior knowledge of the bylaw’s requirement of annual submission by Oct 1st for all projects anticipated in the next 6 years.  While one can argue that given their positions they ought to have known the rules, there is no reason to question their veracity.  In fact, Kelly has been a great source of information on the police station project.  If anything, the culpable parties are allowing Kelly and Haarde to be made the scapegoats. 

Instead, it is the Town Manager, Maureen Valente, and BOS Chairman, Larry O’Brien, that need to be censured for intentional violations of the bylaw and for condoning infractions thereof by others.  The evidence - CIPC minutes Nov 12, 2012:
 
“Town Manager Maureen Valente and Town Selectman Larry O’Brien addressed the committee, regarding proposed changes to the CIPC by-laws and appointment of members for FY 2014….Both Maureen and Larry stated they don’t intend to appoint two new members for 3 year terms because it doesn’t make sense since they have recommended this bylaw change.”

From the minutes the CIPC pushed back against Valente and O’Brien at their next meeting in Dec voting to:

 “Appoint the full seven members to the committee. This recommendation was made understanding and recognizing that a by-law change might be approved at the 2013 Town Meeting that would change the make-up and mission of the committee, but it would enable us to be in compliance with the existing by-law.”

The leaders never did fill the vacancies.  When queried, Valente indicated that she had approached several people, but they were not interested.  When pressed if the openings, as per normal, were publically advertised, Valente answered, “No.”  Was the reason for what Howie Carr would call a “nationwide search” a fear that volunteers would come forward who might prove difficult to control or who might possess views different from the status quo on major capital projects?

While the above is telling, the irrefutable proof as to the leaders disregard of the bylaw – conscious acts of commission - is found in the report from this year’s Town Warrant, Article 22:

“The Town’s current capital bylaw, established in 1998, is proposed to be replaced by an updated bylaw in order to address many shortcomings that have proved difficult for many parties since the time of its adoption. Among these shortcomings are: … a specific due date (October 1) is included for project submission for projects for a 6 year time horizon… much of the detailed work specified in the bylaw cannot be completed by a citizen committee, but rather has required staff to complete the work”

Given their knowledge of the bylaw, Valente and O’Brien had an obligation to put the brakes on the station project, and to conduct public hearings on their proposed article.  Did the leaders hope to implement their agenda under the radar?  What happened when the station project popped up and the public became aware of the leaders behavior? 

 
Town Counsel, Paul Kenny, issued an opinion that the Capital Planning Bylaw does not apply to public buildings.  By implication there was no need to submit the police station project to the CIPC and thus no bylaws were broken.  Town Counsel’s ruling disregarded the history, facts and law surrounding the implementation of the bylaw.

Last week the matter was brought before the BOS and indisputable evidence was presented illustrating that the bylaw applies to public buildings.  Still, O’Brien and Drobrinski continued to hide behind the Town Counsel’s opinion; only Haarde offered that the bylaw may have been broken, and that the BOS needed to set an example and follow their own rules.  However, Drobrinski would hear none of that, advancing a novel argument that it was not until this winter that the Town anticipated bringing the station project to Town Meeting this year.  Of course, the words “this year” do not exist in the bylaw.  Instead, Drobrinski would have to contend that until this winter the Town did not anticipate the station requiring Town meeting action for the “next 6 years”.  Even so, Dobrinski’s “not anticipated until winter” excuse is invalid given the Permanent Building committee minutes of Oct 9, 2012 (see below).

In conclusion, Valente and O’Brien perceived shortcomings with certain requirements of the Town’s Capital Planning Bylaw, which they intend to change at this year’s Town Meeting.  But instead of acting in good faith - publically explaining the issues and seeking consent to make exceptions to the existing rules - they remained silent; failed to appoint required committee members; and facilitated material violations of the bylaw by Town staff and others with respect to the police station project. 

Worse, since being made public, the majority of the BOS and Valente refuse to even consider the possibility that errors may have been made.  Instead, they rely on Town Counsel who, almost like an accessory after the fact, excuses their actions via an inexplicable opinion. 

Perhaps the Town Counsel, the Town Manager and the majority of the BOS have been working together for so long that they have lost much of their objectivity in challenging and questioning each other’s work.  The end result is that Town governance and management have devolved into a state where appropriate checks and balances are sorely lacking.  The leaders’ collective dysfunction has put the police station project in jeopardy.

The move from 3 to 5 Board of Selectmen cannot come soon enough.  Sudbury can do better!

---------------------------------------------------
P.S.  The proposed Capital Planning Bylaw, Article 22, must be defeated.  It guts the current bylaw and transfers policy making from our citizen based CIPC to the Town Manager and her staff.  Instead of complaining that much of the work specified in the existing bylaw has required Town staff to complete, and using that as an excuse to replace the CIPC with a powerless advisory committee, said work ought to be performed in close conjunction with the existing, fully staffed CIPC.

----------------------------------------------------

PERMANENT BUILDING COMMITTEE MINUTES OCT 9, 2012
Present: Co-Chairs Michael Melnick and Elaine Jones, Craig Blake, William Braun, Gifford Perry, Thomas Joyner and Thomas Scarlata.

 
Also present: Facilities Director James Kelly.

The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. at the DPW Building.

Police Station: Mr. Kelly updated the PBC on the status of the existing building which now also accommodates a combined Police/Fire dispatch function. In essence, the building does not fit its uses; a new roof is scheduled for the next FY in the Russo-Barr roof report; heating has been supplemented with heat pumps with added cooling; some windows are inoperable; the building is operationally poor in regard to insulation; there are leaks which have the potential to impact equipment in the 911 room; and the jail cell materials are obsolete

.
The Committee recommends that the architects report be updated. The Committee further recommends that construction of a new Police Station adjacent to the Fire Headquarters on Hudson Road be the first priority for major capital building construction projects.