Above: These houses on Sarah’s Trace belong to three families seeking money from the town following damage they say happened during construction of Cole Middle School in 2010-11.
Residents of three houses are accusing officials of willfully ignoring their plight
Four residents of Sarah’s Trace and former School Committee Chair Jean Ann Guliano addressed the School Committee during public comment Oct. 11, 2022, saying fraud was the reason they were never compensated for damage done to their homes during the construction of Cole Middle School in 2010-11. Find a video of that meeting HERE.
Guliano said she wanted the School Committee to disregard advice from the committee’s lawyer and ask the Town Council to either put a bond referendum before voters to compensate the homeowners or use the money leftover from the $52 million school bond referendum approved by voters in 2008 to build the new Cole and other school construction.
For the homeowners and Guliano, this is an issue of fairness and making right a wrong that happened more than a decade ago.
Homeowner Keith Amellotte, during his statement, said his house and the two others “were knowingly sacrificed for the greater good but under false pretenses.”
“Fraud has no statute of limitations until it is uncovered,” said Wendy Amellotte during her public comment. “Not acting now makes you complicit.”
For school and town officials, it is not that simple, since the homeowners sued the town, the school district, the contractor, and the contract management company in February 2011 and the court case that followed ended in a decision in favor of the homeowners and an agreement signed by all involved parties, including the homeowners.
In the lawsuit, the Sarah’s Trace residents contended the school department failed to stop using vibratory rollers after the homeowners had told school officials their houses were being damaged by the vibrations. Guliano, at the time, had wanted the use of the rollers to stop but the contractor, Gilbane Construction, said it would not be able to guarantee the structural integrity of the building without their use, so the rollers continued to be used. Seismic montitoring done
As of spring 2014, no settlement had been reached, so the suit landed in state Superior Court. Following a three-week trial, the jury awarded the homeowners $240,000 plus interest for a single claim of nuisance against the town.
Superior Court Judge Bennett Gallo had dismissed the homeowners’ damage and negligence claims a few days earlier, saying the plaintiffs (homeowners) had not proven which cracks were caused by the construction and which had pre-existed construction, making it impossible to determine damages. Gallo also did not allow the plaintiffs’ expert to testify on damage estimates – the plaintiffs had wanted an architect to present evidence about needed repairs.
Because the judge dismissed the damage and negligence claims against the contractor and other firms associated with the construction, the homeowners were forced to pay the court costs borne by these companies. According to Sarah’s Trace resident Keith Amelotte, after paying those costs out, the homeowners ended up with only a third of that original award.
In August 2015, the homeowners, the town, the school department, contractor Gilbane Construction and several other subcontractors signed an agreement releasing all the defendants (the Town of East Greenwich, EGSD, contractor Gilbane Construction, etc.) of all liability past and future:
Whereas this mutual settlement and joint release agreement is to serve as the full and final settlement agreement between the plaintiffs [aka homeowners] and defendants [town, school, contractor and subcontractors] and serve to resolve all claims between and among the plaintiffs and defendants relating to the claims asserted by the plaintiffs, the cross-claims asserted by defendants and any and all claims that were or could have been asserted by the plaintiffs against the defendants in the lawsuit.
In effect, the homeowners, the town (which had been found liable for nuisance), and all the other parties agreed the case was over. Find the agreement here: Sarah’s Trace signed settlement agreement.
Despite the $240,000 (plus interest) award, this was not the victory the homeowners had hoped for. At the recent Oct. 11 School Committee meeting, Sarah’s Trace resident Tom Hogan, another party in the lawsuit, said the homeowners had no choice but to sign that paperwork. “We didn’t settle,” he said. “We had to accept the terms that were imposed upon us.” Lamendola has said they didn’t appeal the verdict because they couldn’t afford to.
In 2018, Chris Lamendola said he’d learned new information that made him decide he needed to keep fighting for money to repair their homes – settlement or no settlement. He said it was a surprise to him that a lawyer hired by the school department in 2010 to handle the homeowners’ concerns – Christopher Whitney, who specializes in construction law – had also represented Gilbane in other matters. Whitney was hired in June 2010 (see engagement letter here: Whitney-EGSD Engagement Letter July 2010); his last bill to the town was dated May 2012.
Before he was hired, Whitney had told the construction management firm overseeing the project (SBS, now known as Colliers*) about his firm’s work with Gilbane. Lamendola said school officials were never told. Lamendola alleged then and continues to allege, along with the other Sarah’s Trace homeowners involved in the original lawsuit, that officials in charge of the project kept Whitney’s association with Gilbane a secret and that Whitney’s subsequent involvement in the case meant he was not really working on behalf of the school district. Jean Ann Guliano, who was chair of the School Committee in 2010, said in 2019 she did not recall whether or not she was ever given that information. More recently, Guliano said upon further review, she now believes she had not been made aware that Whitney had also represented Gilbane**.
Lamendola brought his allegations about Whitney to the School Committee in 2019. They subsequently hired James Callaghan to investigate. Callaghan’s recommendation after his investigation was for the School Committee to take no further action (find his letter here: Sarah’s Trace – Outcome of Investigation). Lamendola said he also brought his allegations about Whitney to the State Police, the state Ethics Commission, and the R.I. Attorney General’s office. A spokesperson for the State Police told East Greenwich News in 2019 there was nothing for them to do because it was not a criminal matter. According to a spokesman from the Ethics Commission, that panel only investigates issues relating to elected or appointed state or local officials, not private contractors such as Whitney.
Jean Ann Guliano and another former School Committee member, Susan Records, recently brought the matter of Whitney’s possible conflict of interest to the AG’s office. They were told such matters could be pursued by the Judicial Disciplinary Counsel, which disciplines lawyers who run afoul of the rules of professional conduct. According to a spokeswoman at the Judicial Disciplinary Counsel, investigations are not made public unless there is a finding of wrongdoing. A search of Christopher Whitney’s name in the R.I. Supreme Court’s lawyer database shows no history of disciplinary action. Lamendola said he has been told he could not bring this to the Disciplinary Counsel because he, as a homeowner and not the client, did not have standing.
School Solicitor Aubrey Lombardo issued this statement about the homeowners’ recent request:
“… The homeowners had a trial with a full and fair opportunity to pursue and adjudicate their civil claims. The homeowners then signed a settlement agreement in which they voluntarily agreed not to file an appeal and instead agreed to resolve all claims that were asserted or could have been asserted by the homeowners.
As to the homeowners’ allegations that they learned of wrongdoing after signing the settlement agreement in 2015, in March of 2019, some of the homeowners sent a letter to the School Committee alleging that certain individuals, including a former employee of the School Committee and two former attorneys retained by the School Committee were engaged in behavior that was “deceitful, unethical and unprofessional” and requested that the Town Council and School Committee or Rhode Island State Authorities perform a “full, independent investigation.” In response to the aforementioned March 22, 2019 letter, the School Committee formally retained Attorney James Callaghan, to investigate the allegations made in the letter and to provide legal advice regarding the same. After a thorough investigation, Atty. Callaghan concluded that the School Committee should take no action in the matter and subsequently sent a final letter to [the Lamendolas, the Hogan-Pelosis and the Amellottes] stating the same.”
Lamendola and Guliano also spoke to the Town Council Sept. 28, making the same request that they asked the School Committee, to “make them whole” by giving them the money the court did not.
In terms of using the remaining $5.75 million from the $52 million bond referendum approved by voters in 2008, as suggested by Guliano, Town Manager Andy Nota said it would not be possible to use that money to give the homeowners anything.
“These funds cannot be used for any other purposes other than what was originally approved by voters in the bond resolution that authorized the bond,” Nota said.
The town did lower the homeowners’ property assessments after the homeowners brought a lawsuit (read more HERE). Beyond that, said Town Solicitor Andy Teitz, “In light of the fact that there was a court decision following a jury trial, the town can do nothing further.”
Footnotes:
*Colliers is the same company the school district is working with on its current building project.
**According to a 2019 email exchange shared by Chris Lamendola, Guliano wrote to him, “I honestly don’t remember,” regarding whether or not she had known Whitney was also representing Gilbane. Notes from an interview EG News had with Guliano in 2019 reflect the same information. Earlier this month, Guliano said this: “On the issue of remembering if we were informed of any conflicts, when originally asked on the fly, I could not specifically remember. However, after giving it some thought. I did recall an executive session meeting when [Whitney] was brought on board for the building project. Since it’s in executive session, it’s confidential. However, I recalled that he mentioned that a lawyer at his firm used to represent Gilbane on a matter and if that issue came up again, that attorney would handle it but it would not affect [Whitney] or anyone working with [Whitney].”
Find our story archive here:
Subscribe
Elizabeth, First thank you for covering our saga. To be fair I would like to clarify and put some things into layman’s terms.
1. When Jon Winikur the hired EG Construction Management president (representing all town residents) asks attorney Whitney (he and his firm undisclosed to elected officials are representing Gilbane at the same time) to intervene on behalf of the town because Gilbane wanted more money for something not in the contract, Whitney states “ Of Course anytime. But please keep in mind, as I told Victor (Supt. Mercurio) up front we represent Gilbane”. How does this make sense. Fraud! We and our homes and property were sacrificed.
2. Why is Whitney’s engagement letter not signed by any EG elected official? You can’t even cash a check without a signature! Where was the EG School Committee legal counsel, Matthew Oliverio?
3. In Whitney’s engagement letter it states that he must declare, ANY, conflicts and they must be put in writing and NO written conflict agreement between parties was ever produced?…..signed by both parties, is required by Article V Professional Rules of Professional Conduct: A Lawyer’s Responsibility.
4. The actual email from Jean Ann Giuliano reads ““I honestly don’t remember. I do remember we hired him upon the recommendation of our attorneys (Matt Oliverio and Building Committee Chair Gowell) because he was a specialist in construction law. I recall being told construction law was very complex which is why we needed a specialist. If we had been told Whitney was personally and directly working with Gilbane, I think I would have remembered that and it would have raised some red flags, Gilbane was our vendor at the time and their work had not been completed. It was still our job to hold them accountable. On the other hand, if Gilbane was a client of the firm in general, its likely that may have not raised too many red flags. Since Gilbane is so big, most RI firms who specialize in construction law have probably represented them at one time or another.
I imagine they would have to put something in writing. Maybe there is a contract that exists.”
So, to be fair Jean Ann Giuliano was smart enough to know that a conflict agreement was mandated and never produced! She never says I don’t remember, it has to be taken it context.
My LTE reveals more. Thank you again Elizabeth for covering this, some other details need to be corrected, but is appreciated.
Yes, Sarahs Trace victims were sacrificed and a valid investigation is warranted and compensation is warranted to end this ugly saga so our Town can move on! I don’t believe any resident in our situation would expect less!
Unfortunate all around, but you can’t have your cake and eat it. They settled and even taking into account the ‘new’ information all avenues have found no further liability. All of them are still living in thier homes. I hope they all can find some inner-peace and be able to move on with thier lives
Typical RI attitude: “damage done, ya got some money for nuisance, then found what seems like fraud, but sorry, too late.” Nice way to live. Why don’t YOU buy their homes and live every day wondering what is cracking next!
This is a difficult situation as there is no further legal accountability to the homeowners of Sara’s Trace. The question is: do we have a moral one?
I met Chris Lamendola a few years back and heard his story. I did not live in EG at the time Cole was built so I was unaware of what happened. I became intrigued and connected with Chris and his neighbors later on. They invited me to a tour of their homes and I got to witness the damage firsthand. At Chris’s home, I learned that the entire foundation of his home has been permanently altered and the only way to fix it is to knock the house down and start again. Aside from numerous cracks in the foundation and in areas of the home, his upstairs windows cannot be opened because of the changes to the framing. These are just a few of the issues I personally witnessed on my tour of his home; there are countless other issues – emotional and physical – too numerous for this comment. I wonder what the future holds for these homeowners. Will they ever be able to sell their homes? Who will buy a home with windows that can’t be opened? I felt heartsick at what I saw.
I don’t know what happened in court; only that there was a trial, and the homeowners were unsuccessful. Did the justice system fail them? I cannot say. I do know that if this happened to me, I would be devastated and would hope that my fellow citizens, who benefited greatly from a new school, would feel some sympathy for me and perhaps be willing to do something – anything – to attempt to make me whole. For the record, I am willing and think this is at the very least worth a conversation. This could have been any of us. Be grateful it wasn’t.
Bleak House 2.0
I feel for the homeowners in this situation, I really do. But if I have the facts correctly:
1) The homeowners sued for damages and ultimately settled, signing an agreement to release all future liability.
2) Subsequently, new information came to light of an apparent conflict of interest.
3) An independent party was hired to investigate, and the results of that investigation determined a conflict did not exist.
4) The homeowners now want the town to reimburse them from the remainder of the bond issuance.
If the town were to do so, that would be…fraud, as this was not an approved use of the funds as voted on by residents. So while I understand the homeowners complaint, and sympathize with them, what they are asking for in terms of restitution would be against the law. While the outcome in this case may not be to their liking, we cannot simply bend the laws and regulations to compensate them in this way, whether we feel they are entitled or not.
They took their claims through the legal process and the result was not what they were seeking, but that does not mean we subvert the law to alter the outcome. I have no doubt that if that were to occur, the town would become further embroiled in legal dispute from other parties who would sue to overturn THAT decision.
I don’t know what the right answer is here, but I do know that anyone making a unilateral decision to misappropriate funds from the bond issuance is not it.
The homeowners signed a settlement agreement and were already compensated for any damage caused. These reserve bond funds were allocated by voters for the school and does not entitle the homeowners to extract further compensation from the school committee.. If the owners don’t think the original settlement was fair, then they need to go back to court, and, not try to shake down the school committee’s and EG taxpayers.
Mr. Fairminded, we believe it was a settlement under false pretenses, so it was not a “fair” settlement. As to your claim we should go back to court, it is a matter of “standing.” Since we were not the clients – the East Greenwich School District was – it’s their responsibility, to you the taxpayers and us with damaged homes, to do a real investigation! Believe me, if it was your and your wife’s and family’s home, you wouldn’t expect anything less! I would say bet the house on it but I won’t!
Chris, what are the false pretenses? That the lawyer at one time represented Gilbane? Attorneys typically have hundreds of clients, and to accuse him of bias without any evidence is untoward. You already tried to disparage this lawyer by having him investigated and even brought the issue to the state police, ethics commission, and attorney general’s office, and none found any wrongdoing or even wanted to look at it. You’re grasping at straws. In the process you’ve sullied his good name for your own benefit, which seems pretty cynical.
Also, your 10/11 presentation to the SC was rude, condescending, and disrespectful. Life is short, and at some point you should ask yourself this question – as a life-long EG resident is this 10 year dispute the legacy you want to leave your children? Recognize when you’re fighting a losing battle.
Mr. Fairminded, it is called “informed consent” , why do you think the 2 former SC members have come forward! They were never told of the duplicitous actions of the lawyer they hired and say they would have never hired him. The lawyer also didn’t follow their wishes to help us and are furious at all the back door shenanigans! They don’t want to be associated with dishonesty and get blamed. I would feel the same way if it was on my watch!
Not so sure why this is a big issue for you. It is for me and my neighbors. So why don’t you identify yourself and be fair-minded?
Wasn’t Mr. Lamendola the one who demanded the batting cage by Cole be removed? And, subsequently, it was? “We will fight, we will fight tooth and nail,” was the quote.
And what does a batting cage have anything to do with the damage to these homes?
Here we go, blaming the victims! Way to go EG residents, if you really are? If you carefully read this piece and Mr. Lamendola’s Letter to the Editor, something is really wrong in this case. Why did the Town of East Greenwich take the side of the contractors who damaged these homes? The town was indemnified from any responsibility and they took the contractors side who damaged the homes? The town admits the homes were damaged! WHAT? The claim is the lawyer/Firm the EGSC hired was representing the town at the same time….without informed consent of the elected officials involved in control of the Cole project. This whole thing is crazy!
So all you pontificators out there should want a valid investigation of what really transpired here. After all don’t they deserve it…wouldn’t you as a EG homeowner if your home was destroyed by a town construction project. Two former School Committee members in control of the project have come forward asking for the town to make the homeowners whole and they are ignored? You claim a valid investigation without a report or interviewing any elected officials or those involved and you think it’s fair?? This STINKS of a coverup! INVESTIGATE!
I am an old-time resident of East Greenwich and I don’t usually opine but in this situation, I am compelled to speak out. I go back beyond Town Council President Marion Fry era and before (She was the first woman to be TC President in East Greenwich and her picture can be found in Town Hall). Such an honest person with such integrity.
I read this story and have one word comes to mind, INJUSTICE.
If read this story and all I get is a pit in my stomach and reflux in my mouth. How can three homes be destroyed in our town, EG, on a project controlled by our elected officials? Upon reading the current and past stories on this saga, to say in the least that the “Town” and I mean all entities don’t have any culpability in what has transpired is dishonest at the least. I have not heard one elected official say that these residents of Sarah’s Trace don’t have damage to their homes. I have also not read or heard and I believe is a relevant question, why did the Town and it surrogates take the side of the contractors in court? Where is that answer? Where in God’s green earth were our elected officials? To deny that these residents weren’t abandoned by the town is beyond belief. I can’t believe that our elected officials have let it get to this point. I find it rather disgusting and disgraceful. Let’s be honest, who moves to our town to have their home destroyed by construction project, controlled by the town, and then be forced to go to court while the town officials take the side of the contractors, and to hear the Town was indemnified, and took that tact is beyond belief, but is obviously true or they would have already denied it!
I watch on national news the hurricane in Florida that devasted the west coast towns on the gulf coast in horror, their homes totally destroyed. Homes destroyed not of their own doing! What gives me solace is the response of the citizens and government agencies who come to the rescue of these poor people, to help innocent citizens recover. They rally for their neighbors and community without any bickering?
I looked back and see Michael Issacs was Town Council President and Mark Schwager was on the Council at this time. I am shocked at their silence on this issue! I read two former School Committee members have the courage and integrity to come forward to right this injustice only to meet political resistance. Who would want their home to be destroyed and not compensated? Be honest. Here comes the pit in my stomach again.
What has happened to East Greenwich? Miss Fry is rolling over in her grave!
Wow an honest attorney (sorry only kidding)! You sound old school, very wise and could represent me anytime.
Seriously this is the worst thing I have ever heard of, probably the worst thing to happen ever in East Greenwich! These residents got used. I hope the town will do something for these suffering residents but am not holding my breath.
I watched the 10/11/22 video of the School Committee meeting. The SC was generous to allow residents to spend over 20 minutes pleading their case. The SC sat patiently even as one resident rattled off his children’s college achievements – not sure what that had to do with cracks in his home, other than to pander to an audience. But here’s the problem with their case, and it has been from the beginning:
Look at a map of Cole. There were a number of homes in close proximity to the associated construction. Cracks in a foundation, windows and doors becoming difficult to open are part of the normal aging process as a home’s foundation settles, even with proper construction. Yet only these residents claimed to have suffered seismic damage attributed to a construction project? Odd when so many other homes nearby were exposed to the same construction.
It is difficult, if not impossible, for either party to prove that damage wasn’t a result of shoddy builder construction, or just the normal aging process of a home.
The fact is these residents signed a settlement agreement, which in addition to compensation, also lowered their property taxes – essentially their taxes are being subsidized by other EG neighbors. Therefore, as the SC lawyer pointed out, the matter is already settled. And because a settlement was reached, the SC and their attorney did an outstanding job protecting EG residents/taxpayers from this becoming a further burden. The voters approved the construction bond for the school project, not to refurbish or rebuild new homes for nearby residents.
In a previous post one of the residents clarified the settlement agreement, “‘The judge turned around and ordered us to give 2/3 of that money to the contractors to cover their legal fees unless we settled the matter.” But you settled the matter, and when it became apparent that the construction bond had residual funds, now the story is the agreement was signed under duress! Sorry, if you have a further dispute (you think you didn’t get enough money), you need to return to court and prove it. I suspect the case would get thrown out, so it’s a better strategy for this resident to try and muster public support and go after residual bond funds. And the SC, rightfully so, was having none of it.
My advice – take the money from the settlement, fix your cracks, and spend your time doing something useful.
Mr. Fairminded, why don’t you identify who you are as I have put my name to everything I have claimed. It is so easy to sit in the bleacher seats and throw darts without identifying yourself! Please be brave enough. I have no agenda but the truth!
This is the Comments section, and it’s completely logical that I would want to respond anonymously on the forum. This forum is a good way for EG residents to post without concern about being harassed or reprisals from those who have demonstrated that they are willing to do so. In typical fashion, rather than address the content of my posts Chris and his sycophants prefer to focus on the messenger and not the message.
Consider my ID every rational EG resident who has watched this saga transpire over the past ten years and thinks it’s time to move on. As a taxpayer, I do not want the School Committee pressured into paying out on a claim that was already dismissed in court.
Who am I?
I’m every rational EG resident who watched this saga play out over the past ten years and thinks it’s time for you to move on. I’m a taxpayer who does not want the School Committee pressured into paying out on a claim that was already dismissed in court.
JF, you don’t sound like any EG resident I know. I am not sure of your motive but all I know is that I find the fact that 3 homes were destroyed by a town construction project outrageous. Most EG residents I know are just hearing the facts on these events and frankly I’m horrified. You are a sign of the times with your selfish attitude, I find it unbelievable. When a normal EG person hears that 3 homes were destroyed on a town construction project and the town and elected officials didn’t help their own residents, your response is “c’est la vie”? You have to be kidding? Your responses are in question and I believe any homeowner in EG wouldn’t be yelling from their roof tops if it were their home or maybe an elected official’s home.
One could ignore the 3 residents damage, but to have two former members of the East Greenwich School Committee come forward, one the Chair in charge of Cole, both saying something is amiss, as a resident I don’t believe it can be ignored. Why are these 2 former officials being ignored? I read that an “investigation” was done and no report, no interview of SC members or the victims doesn’t sound like an any investigation I have ever heard of. This sounds like a cover-up!
I agree something is really amiss here. Where are our elected officials getting to the bottom of this tragedy? Where is the investigation? Where is the community support for these victims?
I agree, no one moves to East Greenwich to have their homes destroyed!…and the Town to be silent. This makes no sense at all!
And as well stated “Why did the town take the side of the construction companies, when they were indemnified from any responsibility?” Where is the town elected officials answer to this paramount question?
JF you sound more like Joe close-minded……. Very suspicious!
Hey, “Joe Fairminded”, if you are so righteous, then why are you hiding your identity? Who are you protecting? We have been very open about who we are and what we have gone through, but you hide your identity and your motives. If you would like to be taken seriously, then step out of the shadows. Otherwise, your point of view is useless. Hiding behind a pseudonym makes you seem as guilty as the rest of them. Be honest, or be gone!
In typical fashion, rather than address the content of my posts and the facts, Chris’s sycophants prefer to focus on the messenger’s identity and not the message.
Mr. Fairminded, such a unique alias. Most fair-minded people would use their real name.
I am glad you watched the SC video from the Oct 11th meeting. Yes, I am proud of my children, products of EG schools, my point you missed, was a COMPLIMENT to our education system in EG. Maybe you missed that.
But I can’t let you spread misinformation:
1. You claim we were the only surrounding properties is misnomer. Actually many other abutting residents had damage. A chimney fell off the side of a home on Lillibridge Drive and many complaints of vibration damage on Wanton Shippee as well as streets over from these. I have other neighbors who do have damage, but maybe they don’t want to have to declare in a real estate transaction. Because they didn’t sue or have the money may be the issue. Maybe you should ask before making such claims.
2. We have direct correlation from the construction to the damage. It is in a report from a firm ExPonent, one of the best Geotechnical firms in the country. Who knows why the judge ignored this at our trial?
Here is one of the findings:
Conclusions:
• Activities during construction of the new East Greenwich middle School on the adjacent property generated ground vibrations that were disturbing to the inhabitants and caused damage to the Lamendola residence located at 50 Sarah’s trace. This is supported by comparing the observations of several engineering firms (Aldinger, PARE, Exponent and Cotter) at various stages of construction, the nature and location of the damage, the types of construction equipment used, vibration measurements by others, our soil borings, and our engineering analyses. (Aldinger and PARE were paid by your EG tax dollars – and our report using their data substantiated our case of causation and damage.)
• Given the age and configuration of the building, subsurface conditions at the site, the repainting of the interior and exterior of the residence in 2007 to 2008, and the timing and extent of the construction, we conclude that the new observed new cracks and the growth of cracks and separations documented in 2010 and 2011 are NOT associated with the original construction or any initial movements that may have occurred after the residence was constructed.
So Mr. Fairminded, your armchair engineering analysis is false and misleading.
3. We had to sue the town to get a property tax reduction. Maybe you think that is a consolation prize for what we had to endure.
4. We had no idea that there were residual funds from the Cole construction bond. When the two former School Committee members in office at the time of the Cole construction project had the courage to come forward, they suggested the leftover money as compensation.
5. We believe we settled under duress of fraud!
Mr. Fairminded, my suggestion is to stop spreading misinformation and be brave enough to use your real name. I have!
Most people have previously heard very little about this case, but not you, sir. You seem to know quite a bit about it…maybe too much…maybe as much as somebody who was involved. So it appears you are not the average Joe as you would have everyone believe. You make it seem as though you are representing the best interest of the town, but I suspect you are representing the best interest of yourself…someone who needs to keep their identity a secret because it just might be one of the names that comes up in the investigation. No wonder you continue to rail against what any rational person would see as a very fair request. You are the perfect example of what we have been dealing with for 10 years…secrets and hidden motives. Let the truth be heard. You are not so fairminded after all.
It would be remarkable and a novel idea for the Town elected officials to be honest and just to say to the Town, “Hey something went wrong here, some of our town hired employees made mistakes and we will find some way to correct these mistakes and compensate these innocent victims. We will find a way to do this. We cannot in good conscience allow 3 resident’s homes to be destroyed by a town-controlled construction project and not be compensated. No other citizen would expect us not to act in this situation. We will never let something like this happen again to another constituent”
You would have some respect for the current politicians (or any politician) to take that course of action instead of hiding, deflecting and deception with lawyers and make the Sarah’s Trace residents suffer any longer.
Amen!
Perhaps some perspective would help people understand why this must be investigated.
After the 2nd inspection of the homes that proved the damage was getting worse as the construction continued, the architect the town hired sent a letter to John Winikur.
“…it could be possible that, due to yet to be observed circumstances, there is a connection between the vibrations and the reported damage.
Finally, for all those associated with the construction, town council, school committee, building committee, school administration, managers, architect engineers, contractors, all of us; how do we behave in light of the claims of damage being made? For a start, we should suppress the normal need to know what is happening because is impossible for any one of us to really know what is actually taking place at the site. It is too complex for any casual observation and none of the cause and effects are intuitively apparent. We also need to suppress the natural inclination to help those reporting damage. Of course we all would stop and offer help to a citizen in distress at any point in our personal lives. But when we act as a town, a committee or a firm over a protracted period of time we are committing corporate resources to the situation and corporately validating the need for the commitment of such resources. And, since none of us can really know the facts of this situation, we are not empowered to corporately commit resources or validate claims (by corporately, of course, I mean speaking as a group or speaking for the group.) We also don’t want to, by our actions, usurp the responsibilities of the contractor. At the end of the day, the vibrations and any damage they may cause are the responsibility of the contractor.”
To paraphrase, he acknowledges that the vibrations could be causing the damage and suggests that figuring out what is really happening is too difficult. So instead, they should use group think to plow ahead and sacrifice the citizens that are complaining. And finally, he tells Winikur that he needs to hold the contractor accountable.
Two months later, Winikur is reaching out to the contractor’s attorney not to hold them accountable, but to hire them…and keeps it a secret from the school committee. How is that holding the contractor accountable?
Perhaps this email from the head of the building committee might shed some light as to why this was withheld from the school committee. He emails John Winikur saying, “I hate having politicians and their petty and underhanded motives looking over our shoulders!”
The title of this article is misleading. Do we ultimately seek compensation for the damages to our homes? Of course. But in this case, the residents of Sarah’s Trace aren’t the people bringing this up again. It is the courageous former school committee members themselves who are incensed to learn what was happening behind the scenes. They are the people demanding the investigation. What is the current school committee so afraid of? The truth?
I’m with you Joe. Entirely possible it was poor construction of those homes. And between the settlement and the jury not finding any cause for the damages and only nuisance its time to move on. Maybe start a gofundme.
So you’re suggesting that three different homes, built at different times, by different builders all have the same inherent construction defects that all miraculously appeared at the same time. The fact that it coincided with the construction was mere coincidence. Is that really your best theory? Not to mention that two of them had successful home inspections just 2 years before the Cole project. Please!
And, to set the record straight, no jury has ever been allowed to rule on our damages.
Mr. Fairminded, such a unique alias. Most fair-minded people would use their real name.
I am glad you watched the SC video from the Oct 11th meeting. Yes, I am proud of my children, products of EG schools, my point you missed, was a COMPLEMENT to our education system in EG. Maybe you missed that.
But I can’t let you spread mis-information:
1. Your claim we were the only surrounding
properties is misnomer. Actually many abutting residents other than us had damage. A chimney fell off the side of a home on Lillibridege Dr and many complaints of vibration damage on Wanton Shippee as well as streets over from these. I have other neighbors who do have damage, but maybe they don’t want to have to declare in a Real Estate transaction…..Because they didn’t sue or have the money may be the issue. Maybe you should ask before making such claims.
2. We have direct correlation from the construction to the damage. It is in a report from, a firm ExPonent one of the best Geotechnical firms in the country. Who knows why the Judge ignored this at our Trial? Here are some of the findings:
Conclusions:
• Activities during construction of the new East Greenwich middle School on the adjacent property generated ground vibrations that were disturbing to the inhabitants and caused damage to the Lamendola residence located at 50 Sarah’s trace. This is supported by comparing the observations of several engineering firms (Aldinger, PARE, Exponent and Cotter) at various stages of construction, the nature and location of the damage, the types of construction equipment used, vibration measurements by others, our soil borings, and our engineering analyses. (Aldinger and PARE were paid by your EG tax dollars- and our report using their data substantiated our case of causation and damage.)
• Damage was caused by direct effect of the building shaking during ground vibrations and permanent differential ground settlements induced by ground vibrations.
• Given the age and configuration of the building, subsurface conditions at the site, the repainting of the interior and exterior of the residence in 2007 to 2008, and the timing and extent of the construction, we conclude that the new observed new cracks and the growth of cracks and separations documented in 2010 and 2011 are NOT associated with the original construction or any initial movements that may have occurred after the residence was constructed.
So Mr. Fairminded, your armchair engineering analysis is false and misleading.
3. We had to sue the town to get a property tax reduction. Maybe you think that is a consolation prize for what we had to endure.
4. We had no idea that there were residual funds from the Cole construction bond. When the 2 former School Committee members in control of the Cole construction project had the courage to come forward to claim this was fraud, they suggested the leftover money as compensation.
5. We believe we settled under duress of Fraud! So don’t the 2 former brave SC members who have come forward!
Mr. Fairminded my suggestion is to stop spreading mis-information and be brave enough to use your real name. I have!
You’re too focused on the identity of the messenger and so you’re missing the message. I’ll keep it brief.
The minutiae of your case is not the focus since it’s already been litigated. As a taxpayer, I don’t want funds that are allocated for education used for something else without a referendum.
Also, the school committee should not feel pressured, and most importantly, distracted by this issue that has dragged on for years. Parents want the SC engaged in supporting and improving EG’s education system for our children, which is their primary mission.
And by the way, what exactly are you looking for? What do you think is a fair settlement?
Hello, commenters. I’m stopping comments for this thread. We have reached the end of fruitful discussion here.
Hi again. I just posted all the comments that were “pending” at the time I cut off comments yesterday. The comments are closed going forward. Here’s our policy: https://eastgreenwichnews.com/eg-news-comments-policy/.