By a split vote Tuesday, the Gray Town Council named eight residents to a committee that will oversee the renovation of the Pennell Institute into a town hall.

The vote followed a lengthy debate over what role the committee would play in overseeing the project.

There was disagreement, and at times confusion, among the council members over what tasks and duties should be performed by the council or municipal staff, and what should be handled by the committee.

Residents in November voted to renovate Pennell Institute, a historic building in the center of town, into municipal offices at a cost of no more than $2.4 million. Following the election, the council decided to form a committee to help develop the design and choose builders.

In a 3-2 vote, with Tracy Scheckel and Margaret Hutchins dissenting, the council filled the committee, and charged its members with creating requests for proposals and recommending to the council a builder and architect. Town staff will serve on the committee in a non-voting capacity and will be available to answer questions concerning each department’s needs in a new building.

Named to the committee were Tina Martell, Jeanne Carpentier, Lloyd Dunn, Don Hutchings, Lew Mancini, Ralph Wink, Jason Wilson and Louise Knapp. All applicants for the position were accepted.

The committee’s duties, a subject of intense debate at Tuesday’s meeting, may be expanded in the future to involve oversight of the project as it moves from the design to the construction phase.

Following a lengthy discussion on the committee’s authority, scope of duties and length of service, Councilors Peter Gellerson, Mark Grover and Matt Sturgis voted to fill the committee and begin to formulate the requests for proposals. Applications for the committee were sought from interested community members over the last few weeks.

The order to select the members was on the agenda for the previous meeting, but it was postponed. Gellerson, Grover and Sturgis agreed it was best to name the committee this week in order to get the project moving forward. Construction is likely to begin this year, but the building will not be ready until 2010.

“I’m a little concerned we are not moving forward,” said Grover, who wished to get the committee started on the primary tasks of creating the requests for proposals, while the council figures out how exactly the group of residents will oversee the project and interact with the architect, builders and town staff during construction.

“We can always continue to charge them with more things,” he said.

But Hutchins and Scheckel disagreed, arguing that the applicants for the committee signed on only to create the requests for proposals, while other residents who did not apply may want to serve on a committee that oversees the actual construction.

“You may find that you have other people out there who want to be on a building committee,” said Hutchins.

The pair said town staff could at the next meeting decide the exact role for the committee, take applications from citizens who would then be informed of their exact responsibilities, and form the group. In the meantime, town staff, including Town Manager Deborah Cabana and Doug Webster, the building administrator, could create the requests for proposals, just as they do with any town project.

“I think that’s what we pay the manager and director of buildings for,” Scheckel said.

John Welch, a resident who spoke at the meeting, agreed, saying that requests for proposals are a precursor to a legal contract and should not be written lightly.

“You don’t want any holes. You don’t want it done by somebody who is just a volunteer,” he said.

Scheckel also worried that a citizen group with oversight authority would trouble architects, engineers and builders used to dealing directly with town employees on municipal projects. She suggested the councilors speak with the people the town may hire for the project to see how they would prefer to set up the chain of command.

“I would want to know that the professionals we are dealing with are comfortable,” she said.

Cabana said it would be difficult for her and the town staff to complete the requests for proposals at the same time she is putting together a 2009-10 budget draft, due in 17 working days. But, she said, the staff would do their best if asked to create the proposals.

Sturgis, who had the idea to keep the committee involved directly through the course of the project, said a citizen committee would give residents a larger stake in the project while utilizing their knowledge of the town. It would also put a few more sets of eyes on the project.

“I think it’s better to have a citizen committee rather than a council committee because ultimately the council is going to have to review it before any decisions are made,” he said.

Over the next few weeks, the council is going to have to decide just what authority the committee will have while overseeing the project.

The council has been debating whether to use a general contractor or a construction manager at-risk, each with slightly different ways of managing the renovation. Also yet to be answered are to whom from the town will the head contractor report, who can sign off on change orders, and what will be the relationship between the citizen committee, town staff and the council.

After a free-flowing discussion among councilors Tuesday night, some residents aren’t sure the questions are close to being answered.

“The confusion continues as I can see at this meeting,” said Deb Mancini, a former councilor.