01:00 AM EST on Tuesday, February 27, 2007

By Maria Armental

Journal Staff Writer

CHARLESTOWN — At the heart of the dispute were two outstanding bills for approximately $62,000 related to the construction of the new police station.

Town officials don’t question the work was done or that the bills are due. The controversy goes back to the two prior Town Councils and whether, in approving the expenditures, they violated the Town Charter by exceeding the original $3.3 million authorized by voters without seeking approval from voters.

In the middle of the debate, Town Administrator Edward M. Barrett has refused to pay the bills and the state auditor general, Ernest A. Almonte, is now reviewing the books.

In the end, the council voted 3 to 2 to instruct Barrett to pay the bills that were originally due last month.

Councilmen James M. Mageau and Bruce W. Picard voted against.

“I find this troubling in the extreme since these bills are contractual obligations,” Council President Katharine H. Waterman said last night.

“It doesn’t matter if this council approves of what the previous council did or not,” Waterman said. “We stand to jeopardize the town’s reputation if all of a sudden we have a new policy and we don’t pay bills.”

Town Solicitor Robert E. Craven suggested the council hold off on paying the bills until hearing from Almonte and, in the meantime, write a letter to the contractor explaining the situation.

If the town pays the bills and then finds out proper procedure was not followed, Craven said, “you are compounding the same problem.”

Waterman said the additional expenditures — related to new fire-code regulations, higher construction (and fuel) costs — could not be anticipated.

“This isn’t the contractor’s fault,” she said.

Council Vice President Harriet A. Allen called the process “improper,” with additional moneys being transferred from various accounts, but said the actual over-expenditures as of Sept. 30, 2006 were $194,688 — 5.9 percent over the original $3.3 million. Part of that money, she said, has already been paid through interest income and transfers from the general fund.

“We ended up with a police station that probably cost us $3.7 million and is worth $4.25 million. That’s a pretty good deal,” Allen said.

Final project costs are not yet available.

“It appears that the philosophy behind it is that the end justifies the means,” Barrett said.

“I believe very strongly that the taxpayers should have a full and complete accounting,” the administrator said.

“I don’t know whether or not all the [procedures] were followed. I don’t want to jump into the middle of a morass, a financial morass,” he said, asking the council to give the auditor general another two weeks to “wrap up” his review.

“You are not being asked to do anything illegal, Mr. Barrett,” Waterman told Barrett. “Actually, just the opposite. Holding out on a bill, when the work has been done is” a breach of contract.

Barrett said he will pay the bills as instructed by the majority of the council. But the battle may not be over as Mageau said he would file a temporary restraining order through his private counsel to halt the town from paying the bills until a ruling is given.

Also last night, the council discussed proposed changes to its rules of procedure that would move public comment to the beginning of the meeting — it is currently the last item on the agenda — and allow council members more flexibility in recognizing members from the public to speak during council discussion.

The council president or its representative in her absence would retain the sole power to recognize a speaker, but other council members could request someone is recognized.

Residents had feared the council wanted to eliminate or severely limit public comment from meetings.

marmenta@projo.com