The concerns of environmental faculty at this point were primarily that proper erosion control procedures be implemented during construction, that appropriate regulatory procedures be followed (the site required a Notice of Intent and oversight by the Conservation Commission), that endangered species habitat not be disturbed (i.e., the college comply with the regulations of the Wetlands Protection Act), and that the college understood that the environmental faculty were available as a resource. What the faculty didn’t know at this point was that the project was more complicated than they were led to believe
| .On March 10 of 2000, five days before Mr. Mitchell’s site visit, the contract had been put out to bid. This contract specified fill, loam, limestone, fertilizer, and herbicide. The college disclosed none of this in the RDA submitted to the Conservation Commission, nor did they disclose this to their own environmental faculty. On March 31 the bids were opened. There were two bidders. Sommer Electric received the contract. Just three months after the modest proposal, estimated to cost just $35,000, the project had grown to be a $176,650 project. |
 |
| … and grown again.According to the college’s Dean of Administration and Finance, the final cost of the project was $343,100.79. |
 |
