UMass violated bid law, AG rules

Decision could delay $20m dorm project

The state attorney general's office has ruled that the University of Massachusetts at Lowell violated public bidding laws in awarding a $20 million student housing project to a local developer.

In a decision handed down late Wednesday, Assistant Attorney General Brian C. O'Donnell found that the planned development, a 400-student housing complex that would be leased to the university, is rightfully a public construction project and therefore subject to state bidding laws.

University officials had argued that the project, which the developer would own and maintain, was private, giving them greater latitude in awarding the contract. But state officials concluded that the public university created detailed specifications and design concepts for the building and would in all likelihood assume ownership of the property eventually.

The ruling could delay construction or even force a rebidding of the project, which would set back the university's efforts to quickly build more campus housing.

In October, UMass-Lowell announced plans for a major expansion that included new dormitories to double the amount of student housing. The university, which now provides housing for about 25 percent of its nearly 12,000 students, has about 400 students scrambling for campus housing as the fall semester approaches.

In May, UMass-Lowell awarded the project to Brasi Development, a Lowell firm. Academic Village Foundation, a nonprofit dormitory developer in Medfield that was vying for the contract and said it had offered a lower annual lease, filed a complaint with state officials accusing the university of unfairly dismissing its offer.

Jack Kendrick, president and chief executive of Academic Village, said yesterday that he felt vindicated by the ruling, and he renewed his accusation that university officials had corrupted the bidding process by colluding with the winning developer.

"Based on the decision, the process was not conducted on a level playing field," he said.

In his complaint, Kendrick said the Brasi proposal was more expensive and unsuitable for a student dormitory because of its proximity to an active rail line.

Patti McCafferty, a UMass-Lowell spokeswoman, took issue with the state's decision, describing the bidding process as proper and transparent.

"This was a very open, transparent, and public process," she said. "It was a private development process, and we feel the process was done legally and correctly."

University officials are in discussions with the attorney general's office over the decision and hope to avoid putting the project out to bid a second time.

James McClutchy, the head of Brasi Development, could not be reached for comment.

McCafferty denied Kendrick's allegations of favoritism and said the university rejected Academic Village's proposal because it did not comply with bidding guidelines that called for the building to be completed by next August.

A 13-member university panel chose the Brasi proposal. UMass-Lowell chancellor Martin T. Meehan, a former congressman, recused himself from the selection process because some of the developers vying for the project had contributed to his political campaigns. McClutchy had not contributed to Meehan's campaign, according to federal records.

Brasi had proposed to build the dorm on a 4-acre parcel bordering the south campus and to rent it to the university for $2.6 million annually for the first five years.

Academic Village had offered to lease its dorm for $2.32 million annually and give the complex to the university free of charge after 40 years, Kendrick said.

University officials, however, said the overall cost of the Academic Village facility would have been higher.

The ruling did not address Kendrick's charges of collusion, and a spokesman for the attorney general's office said he could not say whether officials are investigating the charges.

Karen Courtney - director of the Foundation For Fair Contracting of Massachusetts, which filed a similar complaint against the university in the same case - said the ruling has broad implications for public projects.

"It's an important case to establish that this type of work is public construction and should be publicly bid," she said. "We felt the law was pretty clear."

Peter Schworm can be reached at schworm@globe.com.