Marblehead school board split over Village project issue

MARBLEHEAD – Questions about the contractor and owner?s project manager on the Marblehead Village School project were answered Thursday night – but four School Committee members questioned the way they were asked.School Committee member Thomas Connolly told his colleagues Dec. 15 that the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) penalized Groom Construction Co. of Salem for hiring an unlicensed asbestos contractor, AEI Environmental of Lynnfield, to perform asbestos removal at the Marblehead Village School in 2010.Connolly sent his colleagues an email about the penalty and reiterated what he knew in a public meeting, then asked the committee not to consider Groom as a general contractor, and reconsider hiring Chuck Adams as owner?s project manager on the new Glover School. The committee took no action on Connolly?s ideas Dec. 15, pending a further investigation by Superintendent of Schools Greg Maass, who noted that “The air was tested (at Village School) after the asbestos removal and it was within an acceptable range.”Maass said he had an independent fact-finder contact Groom and the DEP to find out what had happened and noted that Groom was “cooperative and forthcoming” with the probe.Maass told the committee that AEI actually hired a licensed contractor to remove asbestos from the Village School. Furthermore the DEP counsel noted that “Groom acted in good faith,” even though they failed to do a license check on AEI.?Groom did not have a bad reputation in that office,” Maass said. “Groom learned their lesson. I don?t believe it was their intention to hire an unlicensed contractor and they really regret this oversight.”As for Adams, Maass said the investigation concluded that checking licenses was “not his (Adams?s) job.”Maass urged the committee members to “withhold judgment and understand (things) first.”?I think we need to be careful when we speak about professionals in a public meeting,” said School Committee Chairman EuRim Chun, who told her colleagues she spoke with Adams after the Dec. 15 meeting and “His integrity shouldn?t be questioned at all.”?We all have to be careful of the statements we make here,” committee member Dick Nohelty said. “People get hurt.”When Chun said the committee didn?t have all the facts Dec. 15, Connolly pointed out that his remarks were based on the Dec. 9 DEP decision. “What facts didn?t we have?” he asked.?Your intention was to reconsider hiring the OPM and not consider hiring Groom,” Maass reminded him.?You asked us to take a vote,” said School Committee member Kathy Leonardson.?Someone was smeared at a public meeting,” Chun said. She pointed out that Maass?s independent probe was conducted by a School Committee lawyer at a cost of “several hundred dollars,” to get a timely response to the political and safety issues that were raised, and she and Maass told Connolly that Maass could have handled the investigation if the questions had been raised in a less confrontational manner.Committee member Jonathan Lederman urged Connolly to “Trust the superintendent.”?Times are different now,” Lederman said. “Greg is very approachable.”