Impropriety Alleged In Governor Prence Housing

ORLEANS – A member of the committee charged with reviewing two proposals for the redevelopment of the Governor Prence Inn property is under scrutiny for his alleged role in trying to influence the process in favor of one of the applicants.

The select board convened in executive session June 5 with Alan McClennen, one of six people who sat on the panel that reviewed the proposals for the 5.5-acre property on Route 6A.

The session was called “to discuss the reputation, character, physical condition or mental health, rather than the professional competence, of an individual, or to discuss the discipline or dismissal of, or complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member, or individual,” according to language in the meeting’s agenda.

While McClennen, who also chairs the town’s affordable housing trust fund board, was not identified by name on the agenda, he was observed in attendance of the June 5 executive session, which was not open to the public.

The town’s request for proposals from developers for the Prence project received two responses. The first came from Pennrose, the developer behind the 62-unit affordable housing project that is currently under construction at the site of the former Cape Cod 5 headquarters on West Road. The second was a joint proposal submitted by Preservation of Affordable Housing, Housing Assistance Corporation and Habitat for Humanity Cape Cod.

Following the June 5 executive session, Orleans resident Neal Ahern told the select board during the public comment period that he intends to file a complaint with the Inspector General’s office and the state ethics commission over McClennen’s perceived role in helping steer the town toward accepting the Pennrose proposal.

“We have a housing crisis, and yet the chair of the housing trust hijacked the RFP process to control an outcome for reasons that may never be revealed nor understood,” he said. “This obliterates all trust in both the housing trust and in the process.”

During a joint meeting between the trust fund board and the select board in March, McClennen encouraged both boards to vote in support of the Pennrose project, citing it as the proposal that offers the most financial benefit to the town. Pennrose, he said, has offered to purchase the property from the town for $1.5 million, while the joint proposal called for a $3.7 million subsidy from the town.

McClennen said the RFP committee was unanimous in its recommendation, but select board members expressed discomfort in voting without first having the chance to see the two proposals.

In April, the financial and architectural consultants hired to assist the RFP panel went against the panel’s recommendation. Emily Achtenberg, the financial consultant, told the board that in her opinion, the RFP committee was too “hung up” on the issue of price, especially as the financial particulars of both proposals needed more clarity. Meanwhile, the committee’s design consultant, Joy Cuming, said the POAH/HAC/Habitat plan offered a greater variety of housing options than the Pennrose proposal.

But McClennen continued to advocate for Pennrose at the same April meeting. He presented select board members with his own financial analysis of both projects, and estimated the cost differential to be as much as $10 million in favor of Pennrose.

“Because of my additional research, I believe even more strongly that Pennrose is the most responsible choice [for] both fiscal and design reasons,” he said.

On June 5, John Sargent, who chaired the Governor Prence planning committee, called that $10 million figure into question.

“That doesn’t make sense to me,” he said. “I hope we’ll look into that very carefully.”

Ahern told the select board that he has been closely following discussion and planning around the Prence property, which the town purchased for $2.9 million in 2021. That funding included a $450,000 contribution from the trust.

“And throughout, something just didn’t seem right,” he said. “I kept seeing Alan McClennen going against the recommendations of the consultants, and I kept seeing Alan lobbying hard in favor of Pennrose and against POAH/HAC/Habitat.”

Ahern filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the town on May 9 seeking all email communications between Pennrose and McClennen, Director of Planning and Community Development George Meservey, Town Manager Kim Newman, the select board, the affordable housing trust fund board or any town consultants dating back to the start of the year, as well as any direct communications between McClennen and Meservey during that same period. He said that on May 23, he received more than 1,800 emails, some of which were shared with The Chronicle.

In one email dated April 19, McClennen sought information regarding how developer fees submitted as part of the POAH/HAC/Habitat proposal compare to those for the Pennrose project.

“I see your fee at just over half of POAH’s,” he wrote. “Am I correct?”

That email exchange also included David Quinn, vice president of real estate development for Housing Assistance Corporation. In a response to McClennen’s inquiry, Rio Sachetti of Pennrose said that he “took David off” the exchange.

In another email, Newman requested that Charlie Adams, Pennrose’s regional vice president, stop communicating with the select board, RFP committee or the trust fund board regarding alternative proposals to the one Pennrose submitted to the town in November.

“This is my third request to you of a similar nature and highly unusual for a bidder in an RFP process,” Newman wrote in the email dated May 1. “If you have been directed to provide any of this information from someone on the Orleans side, please notify me as soon as possible.”

“Well, seems like I stepped in it again so to speak — my apologies,” Adams replied. “I thought I was staying in the four corners of your request to not send new information. I can understand however how the below can be perceived as new information — so my bad.”

Newman said following the June 5 meeting that additional communication is “typically frowned upon” in an RFP process after a developer files its project bid with the town.

“Anything beyond that would be excessive, either from the developer or from any individual member of the community,” she said.

Ahern said the emails point to a lack of “open and fair competition” in the RFP process as defined under Chapter 30B, and called for McClennen “to be removed from all town committees and positions.”

“Everyone in town should be made aware of the details of Alan McClennen’s collusion with Pennrose, and see for themselves how badly Pennrose disregarded the rules and abused this process,” he said. “The people who lose are us, the people who live here. And why do we have to suffer because of the careless acts of a greedy for-profit developer?”

McClennen in May announced that he would not seek reappointment to the trust fund board when his term ends in June. He also serves on the board of water and sewer commissioners and the town’s long range capital planning committee.

Select board members did not respond June 5 to Ahern’s comments, as is protocol for items raised during public comment that are not listed for discussion on the meeting’s agenda. Select Board chair Mark Mathison said that the board would have further discussion on the matter in open session at its June 12 meeting.

In a follow up conversation, Ahern said that he has struggled to secure housing on the Cape for more than 20 years. In addition to winter rentals, he’s also camped out during summers. He also moved off Cape for a period before returning.

“It’s frustrating,” he said. “It angers me on a level because I feel like the process in essence got hijacked by people who are housed. At the end of the day, there is zero impact on their life.”

McClennen declined to comment for this story when reached by phone.

Email Ryan Bray at ryan@capecodchronicle.com