EAST PROVIDENCE — It's not done, done yet, but the City Council at its meeting Tuesday night, June 4, set the wheels in motion to halt any future construction of a brand new Recreation/Community Center.

And "new" is the key word because at the same time the body voted in favor of converting the existing, though admittedly depreciating, former Oldham Elementary School building on Bullocks Point Avenue for the same use.

The key component of the ordinance approved by a slim 3-2 tally of the Council would reappropriate $3 million in federal COVID-19 relief American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds previously approved for the new endeavor, which is proposed to be built on the grounds of the Robert Rock/East Providence Senior Center on Waterman Avenue, to retrofitting the Oldham building.

The body gave the first of two necessary passages to the ordinance that read in part: "The City Council hereby reallocates and reappropriates up to $3,000,000 formerly allocated toward a Community Recreation Center to be funded from Federal ARPA funds toward the former Oldham School building for upgrades needed for the building including but not limited to a roof, doors, windows, HVAC, and other parts of the building that require maintenance."

The item was sponsored by Ward 4 Councilor Rick Lawson, in whose district in Riverside is the location of the Oldham facility.

Lawson has long said he supported the idea of a Rec/Community Center. In concert, he has championed the Oldham campus as a place for a small business incubator, similar to the Hope & Main operation in nearby Warren.

However, after further thought and a tour of Oldham, he most recently opined it, which was shuttered as an active district school building by the then state-appointed Budget Commission in 2012, was the most appropriate place to do so.

Last Tuesday, his sentiment was supported by Ward 1 Councilor Frank Rego and Ward 2's Anna Sousa. Ward 3's Frank Fogarty and At-Large member Bob Rodericks voted in opposition of the ordinance's first passage.

The decision put the majority of the Council at odds with Mayor Bob DaSilva, who has used the building of the Rec/Community Center as the focal point of his second term agenda.

"I don't think it makes smart fiscal sense to build new construction," Lawson said during what was at times a tense exchange between and DaSilva prior to the vote.

He directed the following remark to the mayor, "I am convinced everything you are trying to accomplished can be accomplished at the Oldham building...There is zero reason in my mind for a new construction."

DaSilva countered by noting the ARPA funding and his proposal had been "vetted and approved by the Council on more than one occasion." He continued, the Council should "think twice before taking steps that will absolutely derail this project," adding later if the city were to return the $7 million from where it came, its opportunity to gain similar funding in the future would be "greatly diminished."

To review, DaSilva initially presented the Council with a plan for a $40-plus million facility at the start of the 2023 session, but it was quickly rejected by the body. He later significantly downsized the proposal, removing two large elements, a swimming pool and a theatre.

DaSilva also sought to have the Council allocate most of the then some $15 million remaining in the city's ARPA cache towards the project, but again the body rebuked the mayor opting instead to earmark the funding towards a host of other items. One of those, was a $5 million general infrastructure line item proposed by Fogarty.

Late last calendar year, the Council relented a bit, approving through the same ordinance process the aforementioned $3 million from Fogarty's $5 million infrastructure tranche to DaSilva's Rec/Community Center, which gave the administration access to a total of just over $10 million to build the new facility. Three million of that total came from a federal Congressional appropriation with the other $4-plus million coming from a state program.

The mayor also implied the city was set to receive even more funding from the state, pushing the would-be overall total available to upwards of $20 million, because other municipalities have been unable to meet the requirements of the grant, making the balance available to those, like EP he said, who have.

All along, DaSilva, as well, said his administration has been working on both projects, saying it was well down the road on the Rec/Community Center plan, hiring architects and a project manager while continuing to flesh out the Oldham incubator initiative Lawson has championed through request for proposals/qualifications and a feasibility study.

In fact, the mayor said between monies paid out so far and agreed upon in the near term, the administration has already spent nearly $1 million of said ARPA funds to date on the Waterman Avenue plan.

As for the Oldham facility, specifically, DaSilva claimed the estimates at time the Budget Commission closed the building to fix the structure were upwards of "$11 million" and would likely be much more at present. He said it's not a simple cosmetic remedy, but beyond a new roof and windows the building needs remediation of asbestos, lead paint and mold.

For certain, the Commission some 12 years ago cited the need to replace the roof, which it pegged at around $2 million back then.

"You need to do a complete gut of the building," DaSilva continued last week, adding, "The administration is trying to do things with a long term goal."

Lawson's retort was "You want the flash," saying as well in Oldham the city has "a practical space" upon which to begin a conversion into a Rec/Community Center to accommodate athletic, small business and educational offerings.

Lawson said he has attempted for the year-plus he's been in office to have the roof and windows at Oldham replaced, calling it a start to the process.

DaSilva said at this point, putting a new roof or windows there "does nothing...serves no purpose."

Lawson replied, "It sounds like you want to run out the clock and sell the building."

As for the other Councilors who spoke a bit during the discussion, Rego said his reconsideration stemmed from the lack of an operational plan from the administration, adding he has asked for it since the beginning stages of the project. Sousa questioned why the city would have to give back money if it were to be used for the same purposes albeit at a different location. She was told some of it, at least at the moment, is tied to the Senior Center campus cited on application documents.

Fogarty did not go into detail on why he declined to support the revision. Rodericks noted many of the issues raised once again recently were discussion often over the last 18 months, that he was of the opinion it was settled and the city was too far down the road with the current incarnation of the plan and money already spent to change course now.

Being done via ordinance means the matter will come up for a second vote and include a public hearing likely to be an agenda item on the Council's June 18 meeting.