NORTH SMITHFIELD – A grant writer known for securing millions in funding for communities across Rhode Island will once again be hired by North Smithfield on a temporary basis, despite a decision by councilors just last year to contract a different outside firm for the job.
Town Administrator Scott Gibbs told the Town Council on Monday that help is needed for completing documentation to receive already approved congressional grants for the town’s multigenerational center.
“There’s a couple things I’m specifically concerned about that I don’t want to lose any time over,” said Gibbs. “We need fresh eyes and somebody that’s deeply connected with the decision makers in Rhode Island.”
Gibbs plans to hire Lisa Andoscia, president and CEO of Rosewood Consulting, utilizing funds he’s authorized to appropriate without council approval.
“I don’t want to lose the time we’re going to lose by going out to an RFP and going through the selection process again,” he told councilors this week.
The plan to utilize Andoscia as an administrator-approved temporary hire, working under deadline to help with pressing town needs, may feel like déjà vu to some in North Smithfield. Former Town Administrator Paul Zwolenski made the same decision to use his authority to spend up to $5,000 for the short term hire in 2023 after first informing Council President Kimberly Alves and Councilor John Beauregard.
At the time, some councilors were unaware of the administrator’s power to spend up to $5,000 under town charter, leading to contentious debate about the issue.
Andoscia nonetheless secured a $1 million grant, also making headway toward procuring additional funding during her brief 30-day stint in town.
Beauregard, who had initiated efforts to speak with the grant writer after hearing of her success elsewhere, had hoped the town would set up a longer-term contract for Andoscia’s services. In early talks with town officials, he noted she had shared her knowledge of funding opportunities with upcoming deadlines, which was what led to the successful short term hire.
But after attending several meetings where heated debate lasted long into the night, the North Smithfield native said that she saw herself a target of political crossfire, and declined an invitation to submit a bid for the more permanent job in her hometown.
The council ultimately hired G & G Municipal Consulting for the grant writing role last January, with a contractual agreement valued at $19,950.
In the year since, the New York-based firm has helped with paperwork and processing for some funding opportunities as requested by town departments. But Beauregard noted the group has not applied for or suggested any grants that weren’t already underway.
“I’m a little disappointed with what we’ve gotten out of this company so far,” he said. “I haven’t seen any big numbers. As far as I know, we’re not the beneficiary of anything that they actually initiated.”
Reading various news headlines, Beauregard noted that Andoscia, meanwhile, has secured $2.9 million and counting for Cumberland; $3 million for North Providence; $7.3 million for Lincoln and $1.3 million for Smithfield.
“I think we should open up the process again,” he said
“I agree – I think we need to change,” said Gibbs.
“That would require us to effectively terminate our current arrangement,” Gibbs added, noting that the contract with G & G has a 60 day cancellation clause.
“I’m concerned in the interim,” Gibbs said of the town’s immediate needs. “There’s quite a lot of documentation we have to do.”
Gibbs said that the funds he’ll appropriate for the temporary grant writer are within the allowance of administrator authority.
“It’s under the $5,000 threshold,” he said.
On Monday, no one made mention that the threshold was actually reduced to $2,500 in 2023 in a resolution sponsored by former Councilor Douglas Osier in reaction to Zwolenski’s spending for temporary services for the same individual.
Gibbs said he has already begun working on a new RFP for the more permanent hire, noting that the town does not have to award the contract to the lowest bidder, but rather the lowest qualified bidder.
“The RFP that I am writing is a little more targeted than the last one was,” said Gibbs, noting that it emphasizes a hire with a track record in Rhode Island and clear evidence of working relationships with departments in the state.
During public comment, resident Michael Clifford gave some early objections to the idea of choosing the person who will have now twice been called in by town leaders for interim help.
“In Rhode Island we have to get along, play with the right people to get what we need for everything in this state,” said Clifford, noting Andoscia is a campaign contributor to many politicians in the state. “What I resent about that is it’s like feeding into the program that I despise.”
For his part, Gibbs said there is some urgency to the issue.
“We do have new administration that’s coming into Washington,” he said. “I want to be very cautious here and make sure we’re ahead of the curve.”
Councilors voted unanimously Monday to issue an RFP in search of a new grant writer. Councilors Clare O’Hara and David Punchak were not present for the 3-0 vote.
In other matters, and along the same new administration transition team efforts to get work done, here is a suggestion to possibly ponder…..
You have so many ppl in each dept to do their daily work, and the tels answered as best they can.
Town workers also have to deal with ppl wanting access to public records, and getting numerous copies. Often. Very often. This disrupts the normal town office function as they pander to such frequent requests….so….while the law says the town must allow access and provide records, reasonably, think about designating certain days, certain hours, ONLY, so as to limit the disruption of the town office functions! Respect has to be enforced as to limiting town disruption on a frequent steady basis as we have seen. It is imperative to get town workings done timely for the town itself, first and foremost. This is stressful in getting the normal work done alone, without the additional time and disruption of the public record requests; looking them up, printing them out, enough is enough. Time to restrict the disruptions and lessen the stress on the workers. Better productivity as a result.
They have 10 days to complete a standard records request and 30 if there are genuine circumstances requiring more time. While they can certainly limit the time staff spends on these tasks or when, they can’t restrict when requests are accepted, etc.
If fulfilling records requests is too time consuming, that indicates a record keeping issue in my opinion. They should all be digitized.
You cannot restrict access to public records. The RI law is agencies are required to grant access to public records within ten (10) business days upon receipt of the request. However, an agency may take up to thirty (30) business days to fulfill a request if they can demonstrate that the request imposes an undue burden because it is for a voluminous amount of records, the records are difficult to locate, or due to the number of other requests for records pending before the agency. If your request is denied, the agency must document the specific reasons for the denial and explain how to appeal the decision. Failure to respond to a request within ten (10) business days is considered a denial.
Gotcha! Great info! Thanks!
So how long did you know there was a town meeting? Did you not run to be on the TC in order to participate with meetings and decision making? So we had 2 missing…..hope this isn’t a habit going into 2025. Accountability matters.
Ms Andoscia went to work for Lincoln for less than the $5000 she wanted from NS and got. Temporarily. She then left due to the “atmosphere”. People had a right to question the fee. So why did Lincoln then get her for LESS?
Yes, very political it seems, to glance at towns that need her help immensely to get much-needed grants, and ask then, for higher pay from them. See the ransom here? I will get you what you need and want, but give me this first.
There is a saying in life. You get what you pay for!
$5k is peanuts for the money she could bring to the town. Her track record of success speaks for itself.
So before it was because the town didn’t follow the process they shouldn’t hire her. Now, it’s out of “principle” and who she is supposedly connected to they shouldn’t hire her.
I love how Gibbs is trying to save the town money and now he is the devil. Didn’t even take 30 days!
The clown car that is north Smithfield politics with the loud mouths continues to drive in circles around the rotary!
First off, having a person THINK, use their brains and see the politics, the alternatives, isn’t being a loudmouth. But rather for you to not be led blindly by manipulation of politics. Manipulation done by canoodling and smothering you with visions of monies falling from the skies by paying big bucks versus your average grant writer. It’s not the loudmouths that cloud your judgement….but only one person not looking at all the facts.
Had the G &G firm been vetted properly, I doubt they should/would have been hired. They haven’t a strong track record. I looked them up way back, expected poor quality, and here we are. Some of us research deeply. It is what it is. Better homework.
So what you’re saying is Ms andoscia should hired because of her strong track record vs. this “company” that was hired. Thank you for agreeing SuzyQ! And you’re a wonderful Monday morning, keyboard quarterback. Perhaps the town should keep you on retainer as a digital consultant!
The point is that now, someone wants to ignore her track record of success and NOT hire her just because who she may or may not be affiliated with or “know”. Conspiracy theories much???
Paranoia will destroy ya!!
Actually no I am not in 100% agreement. You can train an employee as a grant writer by a college course and save money. Or hire another firm for less. That’s my major point.
Paranoid I am not, and quite frankly, that schtick is old now. And I would not work anymore. Too happy living the good retired life, but thanks for the thought I just may have been able to help NS! Lol.
Sorry Suzy, my apologies. The “paranoia”comment was not directed toward you.
Isn’t thinking something is about you when it’s not the definition of paranoia? I just couldn’t resist
As usual you like to knock someone about anything just to stay relevant. We expect it.
And, it was after all, under my comment…but it got clarified how he or she meant it, like an adult….nuf said. No big deal, so why add nonsense….
She simply didn’t bid for the job ♂️
I believe that she withdrew her name from consideration, according to the article back in March of 2023 time frame, if I remember correctly.
Yes due to animosity to hiring her at that $5000 fee and no bidding process. But at the time, it was allowed of the TA to hire singularly without approval. This had gone back and forth. But water under the bridge. Now she is back….and works for many other nearby towns and cities….just presenting thoughts to ponder. I sure would like to make $60,000 per year, from 5-6 cities. Ponder the ethics. The challenge that your town will get what you want and need, above the other larger cities. Larger cities often succeed in their requests, due to their size alone.
Gibbs wants a connected person, a lobbyist, well, she is one. Tons of donations according to OPENSECRETS.ORG. …so a wait and see what will happen…but it sure happened quickly to rehire her, supposedly temporarily to clean up.
You are absolutely correct. After the hoopla of not putting together an RFP for the position of grant writer initially, when they finally did, Ms. Andoscia did not apply. Only one firm did, headquartered in RI. I had obtained a copy of their RFP from Mr. St. Onge, as I attended the bid opening meeting. It was professional, and what I considered economically feasible. On a scale of 1-10, I would have given it an overall 9. This firm was not hired and instead, the town went with the current organization, led by a former law enforcement official, that has not secured any monies to my knowledge. Ms. Andoscia has been successful in her endeavors and if the town chooses to do things the right way, advertising, obtaining RFP’s, scoring the applications, interviewing the top three, and then hiring her, so be it. But to circumvent process and procedure is just plain ignorant and invites the potential for litigation.
Nicely summarized. And being transparent and legal surely avoids tons of questions and animosity.
Thank you Administrator Gibbs!
Great rationale stated in your message about the grant writer situation.
I hope you continue to push forward to improve ways to accomplish action vs. stagnation for our wonderful little town.
We need to move forward ( Ex: with this proven winner of a grant writer!). Our Town has been stuck in non-action mode for too long, for a variety of reasons. Wasting time AND money.
North Smithfield can have smart growth and retain the quality of life that we all want for its residents.
Time for a positive change!
Good luck Administer Gibbs and to the new Council!
Like I commented during the elections, “Gibbs is just a trojan horse”. The agenda will be what we don’t want, higher taxes, a new police station, and of course the new Taj Mahal of senior centers. Hang on folks the next few years are going to cost all of us a boat load of money!
JB is fulfilling his political promise to get her a contract. Ms. Andoscia is a strong supporter of Dominick Ruggerio senate president who is a strong union supporter and advocate for government spending and raising taxes. Gibbs as predicted is part of the old boys network and is carrying out the networks agenda. When will we see the new police station proposal again.
She is a lobbyist. Is registered as one on donation sites. Pure and simple. So one needs to ask the question, do you want favors for your town, grants, then hire a lobbyist. Lots of major attorneys and companies hire them. They influence how legislation is managed. How money is disseminated to areas needing it. A voice. This country is run by lobbyists who seek legislative decisions from the leaders who hold the power of change, laws. Not a big secret. It’s the big political landscape.
SuzyQ the state of RI has a small amount of legislative grants that are already spoken for and are given to the same groups each year. So being a lobbyist in RI is not going to get NS any state funds. As far as federal money she also has little to no influence on the national level. So being a lobbyist will not benefit NS.
That is not written in stone. There are RI lobbyists that affected the terrorist legislation when it came to the Marines suing Iran for example. Enacting changes by enacting laws, thus advancing litigation of terrorist countries. Monies affected, monies delivered.
Do not underestimate a donor. Or lobbyist. Keep an open mind.
I am going to add this…..whether she donates to Democratic or Republican makes no difference. The matter is, her private donation choice. HER choice of tax deductions.
If one can PROVE towns ONLY benefit from this Democratic grant writer via her Democratic donations, then put in for an investigation….otherwise is a moot issue, and quite seriously, speaks of defamatory nonsense involving many up the chain.
In addition, making mention of her political party choice, may just hinder NS from acquiring grants as the supply chain may just see this accusation, and RUN, not wanting to get involved in a fiasco of accusations or possible investigations, thus making NS lose grants it normally would have been awarded. Small towns have a hard enough time competing against the larger cities already!
THINK before you accuse, THINK of the long-term implications that may harm, NOT help NS.