The Massachusetts Attorney General issued a severe reprimand to the town of Oak Bluffs this week for a long list of violations to state public bidding laws between 2009 and 2011. Citing “a pattern of disregard and certain evidence of intentional avoidance of public construction bidding laws,” the attorney general upheld a protest that had been filed by a former town selectman but stopped short of issuing any fines or penalties to the financially-troubled town. The attorney general’s office has the authority to take a violator to court to seek fines and criminal sanctions.

The state investigation began in March, triggered by a complaint filed by former selectman Kerry Scott about possible violations to public procurement laws on renovations to the town hall. The investigation widened to include repairs to the town library roof and a variety of electrical work performed by Powers Electric for the town.

In the 11-page decision released Tuesday, assistant attorney general Deborah Anderson found that the town failed to follow competitive bidding laws, violated a town bylaw on bidding procedures and gave the appearance of bid-splitting, defined by the state as intentionally splitting a purchase into two or more smaller purchases for the purpose of evading a bidding law.

Specifically at issue is the town’s decision to pay out a large sum of money to Powers Electric in small amounts over a period of some two years.

The assistant attorney general wrote: “The town procured electrical services from Powers Electric totaling $185,546 from September 2009 through April 21, 2011. That work was divided into 113 payments. While intent to split bids may be difficult to prove, this large sum of money paid to a single contractor, divided into over a hundred different payments, at the very least, presents the strong circumstantial evidence and appearance of bid-splitting. This practice likely hindered the town’s ability to get the best price for these services, resulted in more frequent and smaller purchases, administrative inefficiency and diminished transparency and integrity in its procurement process, all contrary to the Inspector General’s guidance on procurement practices and the purpose behind the public construction and bidding laws.”

Yesterday town administrator Michael Dutton, who as chief procurement officer for the town is at the center of the controversy over the violations, firmly denied the charge of bid-splitting.

“Nobody ever intended to do any thing like that,” he said. “The attorney general’s office acknowledged that they couldn’t prove it, but they wouldn’t find anybody in town with the intention of bid-splitting.”

In other instances the town straight-out violated state bidding laws, which require that all municipal projects over $5,000 be subject to competitive bid, the attorney general found. Several of its payments to Powers Electric exceeded that threshold including payments of $28,000 and $27,193 for electrical work associated with a project connecting the high school, YMCA and Martha’s Vineyard Community Services to the town sewer in the spring of 2010.

The procurement process used in other town work such as an effort to replace the former town library’s roof was similarly flawed, the investigation found. While the town argued that the roof work, performed by Mark Alwardt at a cost of $16,006, was emergency work and thus not subject to a competitive bidding process, the attorney general found otherwise. Massachusetts law requires that even “in cases of extreme emergency” the awarding authority can circumvent the open bidding process only with the prior consent of the commissioner of the Division of Capital Asset Management.

“It is undisputed that the town failed to get DCAM approval for the library roof repairs,” the report said.

The attorney general’s office found that the town also violated its own bylaw which requires “advertisement and public opening of bids where the probable cost of the repairs or renovations will exceed $4,000.”

Mr. Dutton acknowledged that the town had failed to follow the law, although he said the practices now in the spotlight have been long in place.

“We were doing things the way they’ve been done for generations,” the town administrator said. “And you know what? We know now that the way we’ve been doing it for a long, long time has been wrong, so we’re going to make corrections. We’re going to avail ourselves of the offer from the AG’s office to do some training, hopefully down here. We’ll rely on them for some guidance to get us to the point where we’re doing routine measures to the letter of the law.”

The town will now be subject to quarterly monitoring by the Attorney General for its compliance with bidding laws, and the town administrator and other department heads will be required to receive training in procurement laws. Mr. Dutton attributed the fact that the attorney general did not penalize the town to cooperation with state investigators by him and others.

“I think they acknowledged and rightfully so that we were very up-front with how we were doing things, flawed as they were,” he said. “It’s not in the decision but I suspect they found there was no intent to line people’s pockets.”

Following the release of the ruling this week, Oak Bluffs selectman and board chairman Kathy Burton tried to put the town’s procurement troubles in its past and said she welcomed the state-ordered training and monitoring.

“It is unfortunate that it happened but since it did happen I’m very much looking forward to the procurement training, not only for large projects and repairs, but I’m also interested in understanding how it relates to the service providers to the town,” Ms. Burton said. “I’m also very much looking forward to the quarterly reporting which will be very helpful in making sure we’re detail-oriented and that we’re dotting all our i’s and crossing our t’s. Everyone wants to do the right thing but this will make sure we do the right thing.”

Mr. Dutton said he welcomes the assistance of the attorney general but reiterated his belief that the competitive bidding process, as written, puts Island contractors at a disadvantage and sees local tax money shipped off-Island.

“I don’t mean to minimize the importance of following the law but when you go through the bid laws it’s very difficult, because we’re so geographically isolated, for contractors here to get government contracts,” he said.