Select Board chair says African Meeting House investigation RFP will be amended; critics press for outside investigator and emergency meeting

Malcolm McNabb, Select Board member and chair of the African Meeting House procurement work group, said the request for proposals for an independent investigation will be corrected and that responses are due July 2.

The announcement came after public commenters and work-group members criticized the RFP’s wording and the committee’s handling of advertisement details. The committee plans to issue an addendum to clarify the RFP, McNabb said, and the town will re-notify the 17 firms that were sent the solicitation.

The dispute centers on language and scope omissions. Clifford Williams, a frequent public commenter, told the board the draft posted to the Boston Globe and other outlets “is not what we asked for and it's not what we're wanting,” and urged the board to hold an in-person emergency meeting so opponents can review the procurement in full. Williams said the RFP has been amended multiple times but still lacks material items his group requested, including geolocation and verification steps and investigator certification requirements.

Luke Thornwell, a member of the African Meeting House committee, urged that the church’s historical and spiritual significance be respected during the inquiry and said prayer and faith have guided some members’ participation in the process.

A town procurement official, identified in the meeting as Brian (Chief Procurement Officer), described the process used for the RFP and defended standard procurement practice under Massachusetts procurement law, noting that limiting applicants geographically could undermine “an open, fair, competitive competition” under Mass. Gen. Law Chapter 30B. The official said the town had invited over 17 vendors by direct notice, published the solicitation in the Boston Globe and placed it in the Central Register and state contract listings.

McNabb acknowledged an error in the posted version and apologized to the committee. He said the committee had generally approved the RFP pages during prior meetings but that one page omitted language requested by committee members; he said the omission was his oversight. He told Clifford Williams he would follow up directly and offered to call this week.

Several public commenters asked for an investigator from outside New England, saying local investigators might have overlapping affiliations with people connected to the case. The chief procurement official said the RFP’s scope typically describes means and methods in general terms and that specific investigative techniques (for example, checking alibis) are normally proposed by vendors in their responses and evaluated by the committee.

McNabb said he did not believe a special meeting was required, calling the error correctable via an addendum and re-notification of recipients. Committee members and some public commenters pressed for committee review of the addendum before it is posted; McNabb and staff agreed to circulate the amendment and “make sure that everybody reviews it before it goes out again.”

The select board did not take a formal vote on the item at the June 11 meeting and instead directed staff and the working group to circulate the forthcoming addendum, notify firms, and ensure committee review of the corrected RFP.

Next steps include circulation of a written addendum this week, direct notification to firms that previously downloaded the RFP, and follow-up between the chair and committee members to confirm the corrected language. Committee members and public commenters said they remain prepared to request a public in-person meeting if the addendum is not satisfactory.