DCA Rejects $800,000 Anticipated Revenue
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 20, 2010)
SOUTH AMBOY — Apparently with much reluctance, the City Council voted at a
Special Meeting held last week to adopt an Amendment to the Calendar Year
2010 Budget and the Budget itself without including $800,000 as anticipated
revenue, thereby leading to a massive tax-increase this year.
The Resolution was moved by Councilman Joseph Connors, seconded by
Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 4-0. Councilman Donald Applegate abstained from
voting.
The Amendment to the CY 2010 Budget will increase local taxes by another
$722,576, on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration
and the Council on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy,
from the unamended spending plan. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010
Budget as introduced, the amended Budget will increase the municipal portion
of taxes on the average home by $268.
Council President Fred Henry, who is running for Mayor in the Nov. 2
election, called a letter the city received from the state Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) “flawed” because its officials “would not allow us to put
that money in our Budget for this year as anticipated revenue,” so “our hands
are tied with this” because “DCA says we have to adopt a Budget.
“We’re in a bind here,” Henry declared. “This is something the people of
South Amboy are going to have to deal-with.”
Despite a state requirement that the final CY 2010 Budget be approved by
the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24, no action was taken by
the Council at its regular meeting the previous week.
At another Special Meeting held on Sept. 27, the three Council members
in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refused to take any action on
the spending plan.
After adjourning into a closed-door executive session because “the Council
has to be brought up-to-speed about some problems with negotiations,” as
explained by Henry, Councilmen Mark Noble and William Schwarick refused to take
any action on the spending plan following their return.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running
in November — were absent from that meeting.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s
not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Noble declared at that time.
“I concur,” Schwarick added. “There’s a decision on additional revenue
coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase
Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from
under us.”
O’Leary interjected to correct Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had
signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant
site,’” he said.
“At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community
Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue
source was not accepted,” the Mayor stated.
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Henry said. “”We
had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous
call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not
coming-about,” he said. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South
Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call
that the deal was off.”
O’Leary castigated DCA officials for allegedly bowing to pressures from
“an anonymous caller” who challenged the deal’s legitimacy.
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the
possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
Henry announced at the last regular Council meeting that a Special Meeting
would be held last week in an effort to adopt an amendment to the CY 2010
Budget that would be acceptable to DCA, as well as the Budget itself.
The day after the Council’s regular meeting last week, the Redevelopment
Agency held its regular monthly meeting, at which representatives of The
O’Neill Properties Group appeared for a slideshow presentation introducing
themselves to the community.
O’Neill is a highly-capitalized Pennsylvania-based firm that specializes
in redeveloping contaminated properties known as “brownfields,” such as the
400-plus-acre former NL Industries site in neighboring Sayreville, where an
elaborate multi-million-dollar Redevelopment Plan is being implemented.
After the presentation, the Agency voted 4-0 to adopt a Resolution
rescinding its previously-declared emergency and a Resolution adopted at its Sept.
23 Special Emergency Meeting authorizing a Redevelopment Agreement with a
newly-formed Limited Partnership, and to instead authorize a new Agreement
designating “O’Neill Properties” as redeveloper.
The first Resolution was moved by Henry and the second Resolution was moved
by Business Administrator Camille Tooker, both Agency members, and both
were seconded by Agency Chairman Kevin Meszaros. Members Benjamin Block and
Melvin Rosado were absent. Mayor John O’Leary, an Agency member, recused
himself from voting but was in the audience and participated in discussions during
O’Neill’s presentation.
The Agency’s vote to change the contract apparently was intended to
convince state officials to allow South Amboy to include the $800,000 in the
Agreement as anticipated revenue in the CY 2010 Budget, thereby heading-off a
large tax-hike this year.
The Beacon has obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by
Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of
Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of
$800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part
of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw
from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
According to a Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State
Business Gateway Service, Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a
“foreign (Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27,
the date of the second Special Meeting.
At the Redevelopment Agency meeting, O’Neill attorney Edward Campbell
acknowledged that Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is an O’Neill
“affiliate,” but noted that he did not draw-up the Agreement.
At last week’s Special Council Meeting, the entire Council adjourning into
another closed-door executive session “to discuss the Budget,” Henry
informed the audience.
Realizing that this is not one of the enumerated exceptions provided in the
state Open Public Meetings Act, commonly known as the “Sunshine Law,” he
quickly stated, “Excuse me; it is for contract negotiations.”
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance
O’Neill, who did not attend two previous Council Special Meetings dealing with
the CY 2010 Budget, also were absent last week.
At 6:26 p.m., the Council members emerged with O’Leary and Tooker and took
their seats. Schwarick moved and Noble seconded to reconvene the public
meeting.
“This is a sad day for the citizens of South Amboy when politics hits our
good citizens’ pockets,” Connors declared.
“The Business Administrator and the Mayor have been trying for three
months,” Applegate said. “It hurts. It hurts real-bad.”
“We’re trying our hardest to do what’s best,” Noble said. “We can’t
fight the state anymore. If we continued, it could be detrimental to the
citizens of South Amboy. With reluctance, we had to adopt this Budget tonight.”
“I find it offensive in this society that anonymous bullying can affect the
city,” Schwarick declared. “It’s a shame that we must allow this
anonymous, scurrilous activity to continue, but to fight this in court would only add
to our legal bills.”
O’Leary cited changes in state funding going-back to former Gov. Christine
Whitman’s Administration.
The amendments adopted by the Council increase the total amount of the CY
2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the amount to
be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
A source familiar with municipal budgeting had indicated to the Amboy
Beacon that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers
“only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not
collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s
fiscal problems.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Women’s Club Debate Night
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct, 20, 2008)
SOUTH AMBOY — A Candidates’ Debate Night for candidates for Mayor and City
Council in the Nov. 2 election still will be held on Friday, Oct. 22, from
7 to 9 p.m. at Memorial Hall across from Sacred Heart Church, Washington
Avenue, as-planned.
The Debate, hosted by the South Amboy Women’s Club, a new organization
headed by former Councilwoman Beverly Samuelson, will be moderated by the N.J.
League of Women Voters. Sponsors include Amboy Bank and the Amboy Beacon.
In a letter on city stationery dated Oct. 18 to the League, with copies to
Amboy Bank and the Amboy Beacon, Mayor John O’Leary cites “numerous
complaints” received from senior citizens about the facility being
“non-barrier-free” and “not handicap (sic) accessible due to the wide winding staircase
too wide for the use of both handrail (sic) simultaneously,” and “no elevator
to enable a wheelchair to enter the debate,” thereby presenting “a
dangerous scenario for the handicap (sic), and does not afford them the ability to
attend this debate.”
O’Leary goes-on to offer as an alternative “the South Amboy Community
Theater” at the Community School, Hoffman Plaza.
However, Samuelson said that Memorial Hall is being used for Debate Night
because the theater at the Community School was unavailable.
According to Samuelson, the Women’s Club was told by school officials that,
as an alternative, the gymnasium could be used for a $500 fee plus $100 for
insurance. The money was secured from Amboy Bank, but then the Club was
informed that the $500 fee was incorrect, and the fee was actually $1,000.
“We then contacted Sacred Heart because they have a hall to rent,”
Samuelson said. “They gave us the rate of $500 for the hall and $100 for the
insurance.”
As for the issue of handicapped-accessibility, the Sacred Heart facility
has been used for many years to hold monthly meetings of the Sacred Heart
Seniors.
Doors will open at 6 p.m., followed by an introduction of the candidates by
Alicia Vitarelli of News12 New Jersey at 6:30 p.m., and the moderator will
read the League’s rules that will be in-effect for the evening
SOUTH AMBOY — A Candidates’ Debate Night for candidates for Mayor and City
Council in the Nov. 2 election still will be held on Friday, Oct. 22, from
7 to 9 p.m. at Memorial Hall across from Sacred Heart Church, Washington
Avenue, as-planned.
The Debate, hosted by the South Amboy Women’s Club, a new organization
headed by former Councilwoman Beverly Samuelson, will be moderated by the N.J.
League of Women Voters. Sponsors include Amboy Bank and the Amboy Beacon.
In a letter on city stationery dated Oct. 18 to the League, with copies to
Amboy Bank and the Amboy Beacon, Mayor John O’Leary cites “numerous
complaints” received from senior citizens about the facility being
“non-barrier-free” and “not handicap (sic) accessible due to the wide winding staircase
too wide for the use of both handrail (sic) simultaneously,” and “no elevator
to enable a wheelchair to enter the debate,” thereby presenting “a
dangerous scenario for the handicap (sic), and does not afford them the ability to
attend this debate.”
O’Leary goes-on to offer as an alternative “the South Amboy Community
Theater” at the Community School, Hoffman Plaza.
However, Samuelson said that Memorial Hall is being used for Debate Night
because the theater at the Community School was unavailable.
According to Samuelson, the Women’s Club was told by school officials that,
as an alternative, the gymnasium could be used for a $500 fee plus $100 for
insurance. The money was secured from Amboy Bank, but then the Club was
informed that the $500 fee was incorrect, and the fee was actually $1,000.
“We then contacted Sacred Heart because they have a hall to rent,”
Samuelson said. “They gave us the rate of $500 for the hall and $100 for the
insurance.”
As for the issue of handicapped-accessibility, the Sacred Heart facility
has been used for many years to hold monthly meetings of the Sacred Heart
Seniors.
Doors will open at 6 p.m., followed by an introduction of the candidates by
Alicia Vitarelli of News12 New Jersey at 6:30 p.m., and the moderator will
read the League’s rules that will be in-effect for the evening
Still No Action On Pet Shelter
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 20, 2010)
PERTH AMBOY — Despite repeated requests by local businesswoman Wilma Matey
for the City Council to vote to accept her proposal to provide
animal-control services to the city, the Council again took no action last week.
Council President Kenneth Balut, who has raised many questions about the
Shelter’s future for the past seven months, was absent from the previous
meeting, at which Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez asked Interim Business
Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach to “review this personally” before putting it on last
week’s meeting-agenda.
Licensed Animal Control Officers (ACOs) Richard and Michal Cielesz, a
husband-and-wife team who are now running the Perth Amboy Animal Shelter, foot of
Fayette Street, under Police Department supervision, have agreed to partner
with the volunteers headed by Matey, who has formed Perth Amboy Happy Home
Animal Shelter LLC.
After meeting at City Hall, High Street, with Matey, Mayor Wilda Diaz and
Councilmen Gonzalez and William Petrick to see if an arrangement could be
worked-out incorporating both proposals submitted to city officials, Richard
Cielesz posed with the group for photographs in the Council Chamber, where an
announcement was made that a tentative agreement had been reached.
The agreement was expected to be finalized at a Council meeting with a vote
by the full governing body.
Interviewed separately after the private meeting, Matey and Richard Cielesz
agreed that it was time to bring the matter to a close and to move-forward
on behalf of both the taxpayers and the animals.
“We’re coming to an agreement for the betterment of Perth Amboy and the
betterment of the animals,” Matey said. “At the next City Council meeting,
we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to get-started.”
“We’re trying to get this finalized real-quickly,” Cielesz said. “City
ACOs and rescue workers can team-up, get this done, and move-forward
very-quickly.”
A three-year lease with Matey’s group has been withdrawn from the
Council’s meeting-agenda at-least three times after Council members had earlier
voted to table a proposed agreement with neighboring Woodbridge Township.
PERTH AMBOY — Despite repeated requests by local businesswoman Wilma Matey
for the City Council to vote to accept her proposal to provide
animal-control services to the city, the Council again took no action last week.
Council President Kenneth Balut, who has raised many questions about the
Shelter’s future for the past seven months, was absent from the previous
meeting, at which Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez asked Interim Business
Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach to “review this personally” before putting it on last
week’s meeting-agenda.
Licensed Animal Control Officers (ACOs) Richard and Michal Cielesz, a
husband-and-wife team who are now running the Perth Amboy Animal Shelter, foot of
Fayette Street, under Police Department supervision, have agreed to partner
with the volunteers headed by Matey, who has formed Perth Amboy Happy Home
Animal Shelter LLC.
After meeting at City Hall, High Street, with Matey, Mayor Wilda Diaz and
Councilmen Gonzalez and William Petrick to see if an arrangement could be
worked-out incorporating both proposals submitted to city officials, Richard
Cielesz posed with the group for photographs in the Council Chamber, where an
announcement was made that a tentative agreement had been reached.
The agreement was expected to be finalized at a Council meeting with a vote
by the full governing body.
Interviewed separately after the private meeting, Matey and Richard Cielesz
agreed that it was time to bring the matter to a close and to move-forward
on behalf of both the taxpayers and the animals.
“We’re coming to an agreement for the betterment of Perth Amboy and the
betterment of the animals,” Matey said. “At the next City Council meeting,
we’re hopeful that we’ll be able to get-started.”
“We’re trying to get this finalized real-quickly,” Cielesz said. “City
ACOs and rescue workers can team-up, get this done, and move-forward
very-quickly.”
A three-year lease with Matey’s group has been withdrawn from the
Council’s meeting-agenda at-least three times after Council members had earlier
voted to table a proposed agreement with neighboring Woodbridge Township.
No-Tax-Increase Perth Tab OKd
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 20, 2010)
PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill will
remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of the unanimous City Council
action taken last week.
Following a public hearing during which nobody in the audience chose to
speak, Councilman William Petrick moved and seconded a Resolution to adopt the
Transition Year 2010 Budget, which was adopted 5-0.
The state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) required that all municipal
spending plans be approved by governing bodies no later than Friday, Sept.
24, without an extension being granted by DCA.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing for last
week with DCA’s approval was moved by Petrick, seconded by Gonzalez and
adopted 4-0 at the Council’s last meeting, from which Council President Kenneth
Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained at that time
that the Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include
numbers for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period
from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517
larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted
TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092, but the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is
$27,607,153 over six months, exactly one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By
Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10 ($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan
in some detail at the Council’s last meeting.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received
since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed,” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was
developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For
Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010
— and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to
$1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections
because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection
Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months,
compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation
Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a
full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 —
was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010 Budget, but now is
increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other
Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach has explained that the TY 2010 Budget “is not simply a one-year
budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during
certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because
those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance
payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted
at the Council’s last meeting.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget
that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a
little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start
working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges,
and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the
previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance
authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year
(Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth
Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first
municipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year
budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were
mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like
Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year
budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from
Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill,
instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall
of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy
Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24
months of state aid in 18 months.”
PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill will
remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of the unanimous City Council
action taken last week.
Following a public hearing during which nobody in the audience chose to
speak, Councilman William Petrick moved and seconded a Resolution to adopt the
Transition Year 2010 Budget, which was adopted 5-0.
The state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) required that all municipal
spending plans be approved by governing bodies no later than Friday, Sept.
24, without an extension being granted by DCA.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing for last
week with DCA’s approval was moved by Petrick, seconded by Gonzalez and
adopted 4-0 at the Council’s last meeting, from which Council President Kenneth
Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained at that time
that the Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include
numbers for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period
from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517
larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted
TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092, but the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is
$27,607,153 over six months, exactly one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By
Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10 ($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan
in some detail at the Council’s last meeting.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received
since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed,” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was
developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For
Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010
— and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to
$1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections
because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection
Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months,
compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation
Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a
full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 —
was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010 Budget, but now is
increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other
Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach has explained that the TY 2010 Budget “is not simply a one-year
budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during
certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because
those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance
payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted
at the Council’s last meeting.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget
that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a
little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start
working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges,
and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the
previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance
authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year
(Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth
Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first
municipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year
budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were
mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like
Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year
budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from
Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill,
instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall
of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy
Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24
months of state aid in 18 months.”
Board OKs Dems’ Rally — Barely
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 20, 2010)
PERTH AMBOY — The Board of Education last week voted 3-0 to approve the
request by the Perth Amboy Democratic Organization (PADO) to use the small
parking-lot in front of the McGinnis School, State Street, and next to PADO
Headquarters for a political rally on Saturday, Oct. 30.
Superintendent of Schools John Rodecker explained that the parking-lot,
which he said “has room for about four cars,” was requested by PADO to be used
“after-hours, to serve hotdogs, sodas and snacks.”
The request also covered its use for parking after school-hours prior to
the Nov. 2 General Election.
The Resolution granting those requests was moved by Israel Varela and
seconded by Eric Rodgers, persuant to a determination that the Doctrine of
Necessity be invoked, after six of the nine Board members — Mark Carvajal, Obdulia
“Obi” Gonzalez, Board Vice President Kenneth Puccio, Kurt Rebovich Jr.,
Armando Tamargo and Milady Tejeda — previously abstained from voting on the
same measure.
Members were advised by Board Attorney Victor Medina that the Board’s
policy on facility-use is “user-neutral,” and that they cannot “make
distinctions about whom you let-in, so-long as it’s within the Board’s policy for use
and not an endorsement of anything.”
The Resolution that the Doctrine of Necessity be invoked was moved by
Varela, seconded by Rodgers and adopted by a 5-0 vote, with four abstentions.
Toward the end of the Board meeting, almost as an afterthought, Medina
brought-up the vote again and informally-polled those members who abstained as
to whether “a real or perceived conflict-of-interest was your reason for
abstaining.”
All five abstainers agreed with that reason.
“At the next Board meeting, a formal Resolution must be adopted that a
Doctrine of Necessity was invoked, and a copy must be sent to the (state) Ethics
Committee,” Medina said.
PERTH AMBOY — The Board of Education last week voted 3-0 to approve the
request by the Perth Amboy Democratic Organization (PADO) to use the small
parking-lot in front of the McGinnis School, State Street, and next to PADO
Headquarters for a political rally on Saturday, Oct. 30.
Superintendent of Schools John Rodecker explained that the parking-lot,
which he said “has room for about four cars,” was requested by PADO to be used
“after-hours, to serve hotdogs, sodas and snacks.”
The request also covered its use for parking after school-hours prior to
the Nov. 2 General Election.
The Resolution granting those requests was moved by Israel Varela and
seconded by Eric Rodgers, persuant to a determination that the Doctrine of
Necessity be invoked, after six of the nine Board members — Mark Carvajal, Obdulia
“Obi” Gonzalez, Board Vice President Kenneth Puccio, Kurt Rebovich Jr.,
Armando Tamargo and Milady Tejeda — previously abstained from voting on the
same measure.
Members were advised by Board Attorney Victor Medina that the Board’s
policy on facility-use is “user-neutral,” and that they cannot “make
distinctions about whom you let-in, so-long as it’s within the Board’s policy for use
and not an endorsement of anything.”
The Resolution that the Doctrine of Necessity be invoked was moved by
Varela, seconded by Rodgers and adopted by a 5-0 vote, with four abstentions.
Toward the end of the Board meeting, almost as an afterthought, Medina
brought-up the vote again and informally-polled those members who abstained as
to whether “a real or perceived conflict-of-interest was your reason for
abstaining.”
All five abstainers agreed with that reason.
“At the next Board meeting, a formal Resolution must be adopted that a
Doctrine of Necessity was invoked, and a copy must be sent to the (state) Ethics
Committee,” Medina said.
Trio Proposes Insurance Bidding
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 20, 2010)
PERTH AMBOY — An alleged scheme to bilk the Perth Amboy Board of Education
out of $2,593,400 over nearly six years for healthcare-related programs that
never existed, which has led a State Grand Jury to hand-up an indictment
charging two brokers and their companies with participating in that alleged
scheme, might have been prevented had there been public bidding on insurance
contracts.
Three Perth Amboy residents and community activists — Maria Garcia, Luis
Vargas and Harry Pozycki — appeared before the Board last week to urge its
members to seriously-consider going-out-to-bid on all future insurance
contracts.
Garcia, who chairs the Planning Board, pointed out that another school
district decided to bid its insurance contracts and saved about $6 million in
the process.
She asked the Board to “open its contracts to the competition process and
have full-disclosure of broker and consultant fees.”
Pozycki, an attorney and longtime reform advocate, offered to meet with the
Board’s professional staff and present a way to have “open insurance
competition” as developed by “school administrators, former superintendents and
government lawyers.”
“I do intend to reach-out,” Board President Samuel Lebreault declared.
Insurance brokers Francis Gartland, 69, of Baltimore, MD, and Brian Foley,
36, of Summit and two of Gartland’s companies, Gartland & Co. Inc. and
E-Administrative Systems Inc., are charged with Conspiracy, Forgery, Money
Laundering and Theft by Deception.
That indictment followed the previous arraignment of Gartland, his
son-in-law Derek Johnson, 39, of Luthersville, MD, and their business partner,
Thomas Kelleher, 52, of Parksville, MD, in connection with charges that they
bilked the City of Perth Amboy out of $216,495 for another healthcare-related
program that never existed. Two other Gartland-related companies, Federal Hill
Risk Management LLC and East Coast Administrative Services Inc., also were
indicted with those three defendants.
Another broker, Frank Cotroneo, made a surprise appearance before Superior
Court Judge Bradley Ferencz, sitting in New Brunswick, to enter a guilty
plea to accusations of False Representation for a Government Contract and Theft
by Deception before a Grand Jury review.
The maximum sentence for each charge could be a prison term of up-to 10
years and fines of up-to $5 million.
However, under a plea-agreement struck by Deputy Attorneys General Dianne
DiGiamber Deal and Pearl Minato, Cotroneo’s exposure would be limited to a
prison term of eight years, with four years of parole ineligibility. That
sentence could be reduced further to a prison term of six years, with three
years of parole ineligibility, if Cotroneo cooperates with an “ongoing
investigation,” which is not described in court documents.
Cotroneo also agreed to pay restitution of $2.6 million to the Board, along
with a Public Corruption Profiteering Penalty (PCPP) of $2.9 million.
PERTH AMBOY — An alleged scheme to bilk the Perth Amboy Board of Education
out of $2,593,400 over nearly six years for healthcare-related programs that
never existed, which has led a State Grand Jury to hand-up an indictment
charging two brokers and their companies with participating in that alleged
scheme, might have been prevented had there been public bidding on insurance
contracts.
Three Perth Amboy residents and community activists — Maria Garcia, Luis
Vargas and Harry Pozycki — appeared before the Board last week to urge its
members to seriously-consider going-out-to-bid on all future insurance
contracts.
Garcia, who chairs the Planning Board, pointed out that another school
district decided to bid its insurance contracts and saved about $6 million in
the process.
She asked the Board to “open its contracts to the competition process and
have full-disclosure of broker and consultant fees.”
Pozycki, an attorney and longtime reform advocate, offered to meet with the
Board’s professional staff and present a way to have “open insurance
competition” as developed by “school administrators, former superintendents and
government lawyers.”
“I do intend to reach-out,” Board President Samuel Lebreault declared.
Insurance brokers Francis Gartland, 69, of Baltimore, MD, and Brian Foley,
36, of Summit and two of Gartland’s companies, Gartland & Co. Inc. and
E-Administrative Systems Inc., are charged with Conspiracy, Forgery, Money
Laundering and Theft by Deception.
That indictment followed the previous arraignment of Gartland, his
son-in-law Derek Johnson, 39, of Luthersville, MD, and their business partner,
Thomas Kelleher, 52, of Parksville, MD, in connection with charges that they
bilked the City of Perth Amboy out of $216,495 for another healthcare-related
program that never existed. Two other Gartland-related companies, Federal Hill
Risk Management LLC and East Coast Administrative Services Inc., also were
indicted with those three defendants.
Another broker, Frank Cotroneo, made a surprise appearance before Superior
Court Judge Bradley Ferencz, sitting in New Brunswick, to enter a guilty
plea to accusations of False Representation for a Government Contract and Theft
by Deception before a Grand Jury review.
The maximum sentence for each charge could be a prison term of up-to 10
years and fines of up-to $5 million.
However, under a plea-agreement struck by Deputy Attorneys General Dianne
DiGiamber Deal and Pearl Minato, Cotroneo’s exposure would be limited to a
prison term of eight years, with four years of parole ineligibility. That
sentence could be reduced further to a prison term of six years, with three
years of parole ineligibility, if Cotroneo cooperates with an “ongoing
investigation,” which is not described in court documents.
Cotroneo also agreed to pay restitution of $2.6 million to the Board, along
with a Public Corruption Profiteering Penalty (PCPP) of $2.9 million.
GUILTY ON EIGHT COUNTS
Mail Fraud Charges Carry 40-Year Maximum
(Reprinted frm Amboy Beacon, Oct, 13, 2010)
By Jim Shea
NEWARK — Sitting in Room 5C of the King Building and U.S. District
Courthouse, a jury late last week found former Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas and
longtime Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos guilty of eight of the 12 counts in the
superseding indictment of their federal corruption trial.
As a result of that verdict, Vas faces a maximum prison term of 56 years
and fines totaling $950,000, while Ramos faces a maximum prison term of 51
years and fines totaling $800,000, when they are sentenced by Judge Susan
Wigenton in January.
Mayor Wilda Diaz released the following prepared statement after the jury
rendered its verdict: “The federal government presented its evidence, and a
jury has rendered its determination. A sad chapter in Perth Amboy history is
closed, and the city can continue to move-forward.”
Both defendants were acquitted in Counts 1 through 4 of charges of mail
fraud. They were convicted in Counts 5 and 6 on other charges of mail fraud.
Each count of mail fraud carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a
fine of $250,000.
Vas was convicted in Count 7 of fraud and misapplication of funds involving
a local government receiving federal funds, which carries a maximum penalty
of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. Vas also was convicted in
Count 8 of making false statements to federal agents, which carries a maximum
penalty of five years in prison and a fine of $100,000.
Ramos was convicted in Count 9 of making contributions to a federal
candidate in the names of others, which carries a maximum statutory penalty of one
year in prison and a fine of $100,000. Ramos also was convicted in Counts 10
and 11 of making false statements to the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Each count carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of
up to $100,000.
In Count 12, Vas was convicted of making contributions to a federal
candidate in the names of others, which carries a maximum statutory penalty of one
year in prison and a fine of $100,000.
In determining the actual sentences, Wigenton will consult the advisory
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines before she sentences Vas and Ramos. The Guidelines
provide appropriate sentencing-ranges that take-into-account the severity and
characteristics of the offenses, the defendants’ criminal histories, if
any, and other factors. However, the Judge isn’t bound-by the Guidelines in
determining her sentence.
Parole has been abolished in the federal system, and defendants who are
given custodial terms must serve about 85-percent of that time.
Defense counsels Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne represented Vas, Jerome
Ballarotto represented Ramos; U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and Jennifer Kramer
represented the government.
Excerpts of Wigenton’s 77 pages of instructions or “charge” to the jury
follow.
“The facts are in-evidence; apply the law I give you. Don’t be influenced
by objections or my reactions. Don’t be influenced by evidence I told you to
disregard. Direct and circumstantial — indirect — evidence both may be
used. Use ALL of the evidence. You must determine the weight.
“The defense is not required to produce evidence or witnesses. The
burden-of-proof is on the government. The government must prove the defendants
guilty beyond-a-reasonable doubt.
“Regarding persons not on-trial: They must carry no weight as to the guilt
or innocence of the defendants. (Eddie) Trujillo’s $ 3.5 million loan is not
to be considered as evidence. Defendant Vas is not being tried here for
other acts.
“You, the members of the jury, are the sole determiners of the credibility
of the witnesses. The burden-of-proof lies with the government. You cannot
make any inferences from the fact that the defendants didn’t take the stand.”
Excerpts of Howe’s closing argument or “summation” to the jury follow.
“Why did Vas lie to federal agents? He lied because he tried to deceive the
federal agents, as he did the citizens of Perth Amboy, all proof of the
scheme to line his own pockets and his campaign for Congress.
“A deal was made to sell the DeKalb Avenue property before Vas even owned
it. On Aug. 4, 2005, Vas had a meeting with Evan Samouhos. The Mayor was very
supportive. Vas said RCA funding would be available for rehabilitation, Vas
is under-contract, and Vas delayed the closing so he could find a buyer to
flip the property. How does Vas buy the property? A balloon mortgage.
“Mel Ramos signed, along with Vas’ signature, on this contract. (Frank)
Sinatra’s February 2006 report showed that he and Harry Jones met with Ramos.
When the DeKalb Avenue property was in their hands, RCA funds would become
available. Ramos is a co-schemer.
“Evan Samouhos was concerned that once he bought the property he was stuck.
The Mayor said there was no guarantee, but the funds were there for the
DeKalb property. Vas assured that his application would be processed. He
wanted to win. It was a tool to facilitate his ambition. Vas had a
fighting-chance and could win the election.
“Who had the greatest stake in DeKalb going through? It was Vas. Vas was a
career politician. The evidence tells you what happened, the concealment of
facts.
“The June 14, 2006 Council meeting. If it was okay, Vas and Ramos would
have disclosed it at the Council meeting. Vas and Ramos were at the Council
meeting. They heard Sinatra abstain.
“The defense made a claim that there was ‘nothing wrong with that.’ The
defense carries that burden. This is not Gumbs’ fault. This was a
very-powerful Mayor throwing his weight around.
“The RCA Agreement between Perth Amboy and 97-99 DeKalb Associates is the
ultimate of frauds. The $90,000 was already gone. On the signature-page, Vas
crosses-out his name, and Frank Capece signs the document, making it clear
that Vas attempted to defraud.
“Vas made false statements to the FBI. Vas said that he did not consider
selling the property before he bought it. He never spoke to the contractor.
Vas didn’t receive any prior knowledge of the resolutions at the Council
meeting and the $90,000 check knowledge. He never ordered Benyola to sign-off on
the $90,000 check. Vas said he ‘recused himself.’ In fact, Vas asserted
himself all-the-way.
“Mel Ramos made false statements to the Federal Election Commission.
Ramos’ written statements were definitely material. FEC Form 3 Report of
Receipts & Disbursements, filed by Melvin Ramos.”
Excerpts of Zegas’s summation to the jury follow.
“There are documents that contradict things that were said here today. At
the end of the day, Mayor Vas didn’t earn 10 cents from the City of Perth
Amboy. The government has not proven this.
“Regarding the June 14 meeting, the sale had already taken-place at the
time of the Council meeting. The fact is, an appraisal came in at $950,000 from
Valley National Bank. There is no law that prevents a Mayor from selling
property, even with an extraordinary profit.
“The fact is that only one person on the City Council had any interest in
this Resolution passing, and that was Mr. Sinatra. Mr. Vas was doing
very-good things for Perth Amboy. The government would have you believe that Mr. Vas
was out-for-himself. Mayor Vas didn’t get a single penny of the $90,000.
“You’re darn right, he did pound desks! He wanted to get things done.”
Excerpts of Ballarotto’s summation to the jury follow.
“They show you bank records, but that does not mean Mel is involved. The
only way to determine Mel’s guilt is to look at the testimony of these three
witnesses: Cesar Jovine, his wife and Shikira Johnson. If you believe this,
Mel is guilty.
“Shikira Johnson is a nice woman. When Ms. Kramer asked her a question, she
said that Mel asked her to write a check. That doesn’t mean Mel gave her
the money. Is there anything going-on between her and Geneske? You can’t
find-out. Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt, the money came-from Geneske.”
Excerpts of Kramer’s rebuttal to the defense follow.
“They made very-good arguments. What’s missing from their arguments is a
meaningful discussion of the evidence, because the evidence hurts.
“There’s no evidence that the FBI got these people together and told them
to lie. None of these witnesses told you that they had bad eyesight. Mel
Ramos approached each of the three at City Hall and asked for a check. Each
contributed and was reimbursed.
“When you commit a crime, you don’t put it in writing. They were
committing a crime. We sit in a Council meeting and remain silent, and then you
approach a person to sign-off.
“If everything was above-board, why not just put the buyer and the seller
together? Why the straw-donors?”
The jury began deliberations at 2 p.m. and broke at 4:15 p.m. on Tuesday,
Oct. 5, returning on Wednesday, Oct. 6.
On Thursday, Oct. 7, at 11:33 a.m., Ballarotto said the jury had reached a
decision on some of the counts. The Judge came-out at noon and said that the
jury had reached a verdict on a number of charges, but the defense lawyers
said the jury had not spent enough-time deliberating.
At 3:20 p.m., a note was presented to the Judge indicating a deadlock in
voting. Zegas said that if there was a deadlock, the defense would ask for a
mistrial. Howe asked for a partial verdict instead, but Zegas said he would
object and instead asked for continued deliberations.
The jury returned, and the Judge read them another charge urging them to
continue, adding: “You are welcome to leave or to stay today.” The jury
chose to leave for the day.
On Friday, Oct. 8, at 10:40 a.m., the prosecution and defense were notified
to return to Courtroom 5C. Both Vas and his son, Joseph Jr., who sat near
his father, sat with their hands clenched, as if in prayer. Ramos’s wife
Carmen, her sister and another family member sat fingering through magazines,
as if to escape the stark reality of the moment. Ballarotto approached Mrs.
Ramos, who seemed to ask him, “What’s happening?” Ballarotto responded,
“Who knows?”
At 11:05, all members of the government’s team had entered the room. At
11:06, the Clerk entered the room, then immediately withdrew to the Judge’s
Chamber. At 11:07, Vas sat staring at the glassed opening in the ceiling, which
was casting-in bright sunlight. The Judge entered the room.
Wigenton said, “At 10:30, we have been advised that the jury has reached a
verdict.” The jury entered the room.
The foreman, a white male in his thirties, wearing a green longsleeve
shirt, handed the verdict-sheet to Court Clerk Antigone Kreski.
Wigenton read the sheet, polling each juror after each count. The Judge
then told the jurors, “You won’t be called to jury-duty for three years. I
will talk to you in the jury-room. Thank-you for your services as jurors.”
The jury was dismissed at 11:14 a.m.
(Reprinted frm Amboy Beacon, Oct, 13, 2010)
By Jim Shea
NEWARK — Sitting in Room 5C of the King Building and U.S. District
Courthouse, a jury late last week found former Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas and
longtime Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos guilty of eight of the 12 counts in the
superseding indictment of their federal corruption trial.
As a result of that verdict, Vas faces a maximum prison term of 56 years
and fines totaling $950,000, while Ramos faces a maximum prison term of 51
years and fines totaling $800,000, when they are sentenced by Judge Susan
Wigenton in January.
Mayor Wilda Diaz released the following prepared statement after the jury
rendered its verdict: “The federal government presented its evidence, and a
jury has rendered its determination. A sad chapter in Perth Amboy history is
closed, and the city can continue to move-forward.”
Both defendants were acquitted in Counts 1 through 4 of charges of mail
fraud. They were convicted in Counts 5 and 6 on other charges of mail fraud.
Each count of mail fraud carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison and a
fine of $250,000.
Vas was convicted in Count 7 of fraud and misapplication of funds involving
a local government receiving federal funds, which carries a maximum penalty
of 10 years in prison and a fine of $250,000. Vas also was convicted in
Count 8 of making false statements to federal agents, which carries a maximum
penalty of five years in prison and a fine of $100,000.
Ramos was convicted in Count 9 of making contributions to a federal
candidate in the names of others, which carries a maximum statutory penalty of one
year in prison and a fine of $100,000. Ramos also was convicted in Counts 10
and 11 of making false statements to the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
Each count carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a fine of
up to $100,000.
In Count 12, Vas was convicted of making contributions to a federal
candidate in the names of others, which carries a maximum statutory penalty of one
year in prison and a fine of $100,000.
In determining the actual sentences, Wigenton will consult the advisory
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines before she sentences Vas and Ramos. The Guidelines
provide appropriate sentencing-ranges that take-into-account the severity and
characteristics of the offenses, the defendants’ criminal histories, if
any, and other factors. However, the Judge isn’t bound-by the Guidelines in
determining her sentence.
Parole has been abolished in the federal system, and defendants who are
given custodial terms must serve about 85-percent of that time.
Defense counsels Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne represented Vas, Jerome
Ballarotto represented Ramos; U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and Jennifer Kramer
represented the government.
Excerpts of Wigenton’s 77 pages of instructions or “charge” to the jury
follow.
“The facts are in-evidence; apply the law I give you. Don’t be influenced
by objections or my reactions. Don’t be influenced by evidence I told you to
disregard. Direct and circumstantial — indirect — evidence both may be
used. Use ALL of the evidence. You must determine the weight.
“The defense is not required to produce evidence or witnesses. The
burden-of-proof is on the government. The government must prove the defendants
guilty beyond-a-reasonable doubt.
“Regarding persons not on-trial: They must carry no weight as to the guilt
or innocence of the defendants. (Eddie) Trujillo’s $ 3.5 million loan is not
to be considered as evidence. Defendant Vas is not being tried here for
other acts.
“You, the members of the jury, are the sole determiners of the credibility
of the witnesses. The burden-of-proof lies with the government. You cannot
make any inferences from the fact that the defendants didn’t take the stand.”
Excerpts of Howe’s closing argument or “summation” to the jury follow.
“Why did Vas lie to federal agents? He lied because he tried to deceive the
federal agents, as he did the citizens of Perth Amboy, all proof of the
scheme to line his own pockets and his campaign for Congress.
“A deal was made to sell the DeKalb Avenue property before Vas even owned
it. On Aug. 4, 2005, Vas had a meeting with Evan Samouhos. The Mayor was very
supportive. Vas said RCA funding would be available for rehabilitation, Vas
is under-contract, and Vas delayed the closing so he could find a buyer to
flip the property. How does Vas buy the property? A balloon mortgage.
“Mel Ramos signed, along with Vas’ signature, on this contract. (Frank)
Sinatra’s February 2006 report showed that he and Harry Jones met with Ramos.
When the DeKalb Avenue property was in their hands, RCA funds would become
available. Ramos is a co-schemer.
“Evan Samouhos was concerned that once he bought the property he was stuck.
The Mayor said there was no guarantee, but the funds were there for the
DeKalb property. Vas assured that his application would be processed. He
wanted to win. It was a tool to facilitate his ambition. Vas had a
fighting-chance and could win the election.
“Who had the greatest stake in DeKalb going through? It was Vas. Vas was a
career politician. The evidence tells you what happened, the concealment of
facts.
“The June 14, 2006 Council meeting. If it was okay, Vas and Ramos would
have disclosed it at the Council meeting. Vas and Ramos were at the Council
meeting. They heard Sinatra abstain.
“The defense made a claim that there was ‘nothing wrong with that.’ The
defense carries that burden. This is not Gumbs’ fault. This was a
very-powerful Mayor throwing his weight around.
“The RCA Agreement between Perth Amboy and 97-99 DeKalb Associates is the
ultimate of frauds. The $90,000 was already gone. On the signature-page, Vas
crosses-out his name, and Frank Capece signs the document, making it clear
that Vas attempted to defraud.
“Vas made false statements to the FBI. Vas said that he did not consider
selling the property before he bought it. He never spoke to the contractor.
Vas didn’t receive any prior knowledge of the resolutions at the Council
meeting and the $90,000 check knowledge. He never ordered Benyola to sign-off on
the $90,000 check. Vas said he ‘recused himself.’ In fact, Vas asserted
himself all-the-way.
“Mel Ramos made false statements to the Federal Election Commission.
Ramos’ written statements were definitely material. FEC Form 3 Report of
Receipts & Disbursements, filed by Melvin Ramos.”
Excerpts of Zegas’s summation to the jury follow.
“There are documents that contradict things that were said here today. At
the end of the day, Mayor Vas didn’t earn 10 cents from the City of Perth
Amboy. The government has not proven this.
“Regarding the June 14 meeting, the sale had already taken-place at the
time of the Council meeting. The fact is, an appraisal came in at $950,000 from
Valley National Bank. There is no law that prevents a Mayor from selling
property, even with an extraordinary profit.
“The fact is that only one person on the City Council had any interest in
this Resolution passing, and that was Mr. Sinatra. Mr. Vas was doing
very-good things for Perth Amboy. The government would have you believe that Mr. Vas
was out-for-himself. Mayor Vas didn’t get a single penny of the $90,000.
“You’re darn right, he did pound desks! He wanted to get things done.”
Excerpts of Ballarotto’s summation to the jury follow.
“They show you bank records, but that does not mean Mel is involved. The
only way to determine Mel’s guilt is to look at the testimony of these three
witnesses: Cesar Jovine, his wife and Shikira Johnson. If you believe this,
Mel is guilty.
“Shikira Johnson is a nice woman. When Ms. Kramer asked her a question, she
said that Mel asked her to write a check. That doesn’t mean Mel gave her
the money. Is there anything going-on between her and Geneske? You can’t
find-out. Beyond-a-reasonable-doubt, the money came-from Geneske.”
Excerpts of Kramer’s rebuttal to the defense follow.
“They made very-good arguments. What’s missing from their arguments is a
meaningful discussion of the evidence, because the evidence hurts.
“There’s no evidence that the FBI got these people together and told them
to lie. None of these witnesses told you that they had bad eyesight. Mel
Ramos approached each of the three at City Hall and asked for a check. Each
contributed and was reimbursed.
“When you commit a crime, you don’t put it in writing. They were
committing a crime. We sit in a Council meeting and remain silent, and then you
approach a person to sign-off.
“If everything was above-board, why not just put the buyer and the seller
together? Why the straw-donors?”
The jury began deliberations at 2 p.m. and broke at 4:15 p.m. on Tuesday,
Oct. 5, returning on Wednesday, Oct. 6.
On Thursday, Oct. 7, at 11:33 a.m., Ballarotto said the jury had reached a
decision on some of the counts. The Judge came-out at noon and said that the
jury had reached a verdict on a number of charges, but the defense lawyers
said the jury had not spent enough-time deliberating.
At 3:20 p.m., a note was presented to the Judge indicating a deadlock in
voting. Zegas said that if there was a deadlock, the defense would ask for a
mistrial. Howe asked for a partial verdict instead, but Zegas said he would
object and instead asked for continued deliberations.
The jury returned, and the Judge read them another charge urging them to
continue, adding: “You are welcome to leave or to stay today.” The jury
chose to leave for the day.
On Friday, Oct. 8, at 10:40 a.m., the prosecution and defense were notified
to return to Courtroom 5C. Both Vas and his son, Joseph Jr., who sat near
his father, sat with their hands clenched, as if in prayer. Ramos’s wife
Carmen, her sister and another family member sat fingering through magazines,
as if to escape the stark reality of the moment. Ballarotto approached Mrs.
Ramos, who seemed to ask him, “What’s happening?” Ballarotto responded,
“Who knows?”
At 11:05, all members of the government’s team had entered the room. At
11:06, the Clerk entered the room, then immediately withdrew to the Judge’s
Chamber. At 11:07, Vas sat staring at the glassed opening in the ceiling, which
was casting-in bright sunlight. The Judge entered the room.
Wigenton said, “At 10:30, we have been advised that the jury has reached a
verdict.” The jury entered the room.
The foreman, a white male in his thirties, wearing a green longsleeve
shirt, handed the verdict-sheet to Court Clerk Antigone Kreski.
Wigenton read the sheet, polling each juror after each count. The Judge
then told the jurors, “You won’t be called to jury-duty for three years. I
will talk to you in the jury-room. Thank-you for your services as jurors.”
The jury was dismissed at 11:14 a.m.
Pact Changed To Seek DCA Budget OK Tonight
(Reprinted frm Amboy Beacon, Oct, 13, 2010)
SOUTH AMBOY — Despite a state requirement that the final Calendar Year 2010
Budget be approved by the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24,
no action was taken by the City Council at its regular meeting last week.
Instead, Council President Fred Henry announced that the Council would hold
a Special Meeting today at 6 p.m. in an effort to adopt an amendment to the
CY 2010 Budget and the Budget itself.
The day after the Council’s regular meeting last week, the Redevelopment
Agency held its regular monthly meeting at which representatives of The
O’Neill Properties Group appeared for a slideshow presentation introducing
themselves to the community.
After the presentation, the Agency voted 4-0 to adopt a Resolution
rescinding its previously-declared emergency and a Resolution adopted at its Sept.
23 Special Emergency Meeting authorizing a Redevelopment Agreement with a
newly-formed Limited Partnership, and to instead authorize a new Agreement
designating “O’Neill Properties” as redeveloper.
The first Resolution was moved by Henry and the second Resolution was moved
by Business Administrator Camille Tooker, both Agency members, and both
were seconded by Agency Chairman Kevin Meszaros. Members Benjamin Block and
Melvin Rosado were absent. Mayor John O’Leary, an Agency member, recused
himself from voting but was in the audience and participated in discussions during
O’Neill’s presentation.
The Agency’s vote to change the contract might be enough to convince state
officials to allow South Amboy to include the $800,000 in the Agreement as
anticipated revenue in the CY 2010 Budget, thereby heading-off a massive
tax-hike this year.
A Special Council Meeting held on Sept. 27 ended with the three Council
members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refusing to take any
action on the spending plan.
After voting on a Resolution moved by Councilman William Schwarick,
seconded by Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 3-0 to appoint Tooker as Acting City
Clerk, the Council adjourned into a closed-door executive session because
“the Council has to be brought up-to-speed about some problems with
negotiations,” Henry explained.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running
in the Nov. 2 election — were absent.
At 6:30 p.m., Henry came-out to inform the audience that the Council would
be out for “another five minutes” because “we’re waiting for a call from
our Auditor.”
The three Council members attending the Special Meeting emerged 23 minutes
later with O’Leary and took their seats.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s
not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Noble declared.
“I concur,” Schwarick added. “There’s a decision on additional revenue
coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase
Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from
under us.”
O’Leary interjected to correct Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had
signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant
site,’” he said.
“At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community
Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue
source was not accepted,” the Mayor stated.
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Henry said. “”We
had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous
call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not
coming-about,” he said. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South
Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call
that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the
possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
O’Leary castigated DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to,
interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties” and “The
O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in
contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in
neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy
Aggregates.
At a previous Special Meeting held six days before, the Council conducted a
scheduled public hearing on amendments to the CY 2010 Budget which would
increase local taxes by $722,576, taking no action at that time except to
schedule another Special Meeting.
The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike
previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at
$266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010
Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on
the average home.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance
O’Neill did not attend either Council Special Meeting.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the
CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the
amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
But City Auditor Gary Higgins said at the first Special Meeting that
“within the past hour at-most,” certain unnamed “developers” had provided city
officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an additional “$800,000”
in new revenues.
“If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this
calendar-year,” he stated.
Higgins indicated that a DCA official would have to approve the “other
revenues” in order for the city to include them in the CY 2010 Budget.
“Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” Henry stated at that
time. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d allow us to do it.”
“It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need
so we can move-forward,” O’Leary stated at the first Special Meeting.
A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon
after the first Special Meeting that DCA will allow municipalities to
anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not
collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s
fiscal problems.
The Beacon has obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by
Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of
Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of
$800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part
of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw
from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
According to a Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State
Business Gateway Service, Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a
“foreign (Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27,
the date of the second Special Meeting.
At the Redevelopment Agency meeting, O’Neill attorney Edward Campbell
acknowledged that Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is an O’Neill
“affiliate,” but noted that he did not draw-up the Agreement.
SOUTH AMBOY — Despite a state requirement that the final Calendar Year 2010
Budget be approved by the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24,
no action was taken by the City Council at its regular meeting last week.
Instead, Council President Fred Henry announced that the Council would hold
a Special Meeting today at 6 p.m. in an effort to adopt an amendment to the
CY 2010 Budget and the Budget itself.
The day after the Council’s regular meeting last week, the Redevelopment
Agency held its regular monthly meeting at which representatives of The
O’Neill Properties Group appeared for a slideshow presentation introducing
themselves to the community.
After the presentation, the Agency voted 4-0 to adopt a Resolution
rescinding its previously-declared emergency and a Resolution adopted at its Sept.
23 Special Emergency Meeting authorizing a Redevelopment Agreement with a
newly-formed Limited Partnership, and to instead authorize a new Agreement
designating “O’Neill Properties” as redeveloper.
The first Resolution was moved by Henry and the second Resolution was moved
by Business Administrator Camille Tooker, both Agency members, and both
were seconded by Agency Chairman Kevin Meszaros. Members Benjamin Block and
Melvin Rosado were absent. Mayor John O’Leary, an Agency member, recused
himself from voting but was in the audience and participated in discussions during
O’Neill’s presentation.
The Agency’s vote to change the contract might be enough to convince state
officials to allow South Amboy to include the $800,000 in the Agreement as
anticipated revenue in the CY 2010 Budget, thereby heading-off a massive
tax-hike this year.
A Special Council Meeting held on Sept. 27 ended with the three Council
members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refusing to take any
action on the spending plan.
After voting on a Resolution moved by Councilman William Schwarick,
seconded by Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 3-0 to appoint Tooker as Acting City
Clerk, the Council adjourned into a closed-door executive session because
“the Council has to be brought up-to-speed about some problems with
negotiations,” Henry explained.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running
in the Nov. 2 election — were absent.
At 6:30 p.m., Henry came-out to inform the audience that the Council would
be out for “another five minutes” because “we’re waiting for a call from
our Auditor.”
The three Council members attending the Special Meeting emerged 23 minutes
later with O’Leary and took their seats.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s
not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Noble declared.
“I concur,” Schwarick added. “There’s a decision on additional revenue
coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase
Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from
under us.”
O’Leary interjected to correct Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had
signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant
site,’” he said.
“At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community
Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue
source was not accepted,” the Mayor stated.
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Henry said. “”We
had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous
call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not
coming-about,” he said. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South
Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call
that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the
possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
O’Leary castigated DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to,
interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties” and “The
O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in
contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in
neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy
Aggregates.
At a previous Special Meeting held six days before, the Council conducted a
scheduled public hearing on amendments to the CY 2010 Budget which would
increase local taxes by $722,576, taking no action at that time except to
schedule another Special Meeting.
The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike
previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at
$266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010
Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on
the average home.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance
O’Neill did not attend either Council Special Meeting.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the
CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the
amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
But City Auditor Gary Higgins said at the first Special Meeting that
“within the past hour at-most,” certain unnamed “developers” had provided city
officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an additional “$800,000”
in new revenues.
“If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this
calendar-year,” he stated.
Higgins indicated that a DCA official would have to approve the “other
revenues” in order for the city to include them in the CY 2010 Budget.
“Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” Henry stated at that
time. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d allow us to do it.”
“It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need
so we can move-forward,” O’Leary stated at the first Special Meeting.
A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon
after the first Special Meeting that DCA will allow municipalities to
anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not
collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s
fiscal problems.
The Beacon has obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by
Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of
Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of
$800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part
of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw
from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
According to a Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State
Business Gateway Service, Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a
“foreign (Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27,
the date of the second Special Meeting.
At the Redevelopment Agency meeting, O’Neill attorney Edward Campbell
acknowledged that Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is an O’Neill
“affiliate,” but noted that he did not draw-up the Agreement.
Women’s Club Holding Debate
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 13, 2010)
SOUTH AMBOY — What may be the only Candidates’ Debate for candidates for
Mayor and City Council in the Nov. 2 election will be held on Friday, Oct.
22, from 7 to 9 p.m. at Victory Hall at Sacred Heart Church, Washington Avenue.
The Debate will be hosted by the South Amboy Women’s Club, a new
organization headed by former Councilwoman Beverly Samuelson, which has been formed to
conduct charitable, civic, educational and cultural activities that help
revitalize the local business climate and quality-of-life in South Amboy.
“The Debate will be moderated by the N.J. League of Women Voters and
conducted in a professional manner about the issues only, without
personal-attacks,” Samuelson said in a prepared statement.
Sponsors include Amboy National Bank, the Amboy Beacon and other businesses
and individuals.
“The Debate’s purpose is to give residents and business-owners a chance to
hear for themselves the views of each candidate and their plans for the
future of South Amboy,” Samuelson said. “The League’s moderators are
professionals who’ll choose the questions asked about issues that pertain to this
city, based-upon careful research.
“The Debate is intended to give voters a clear understanding of where each
candidate stands on issues, and how they intend to resolve problems and move
South Amboy in the right direction in the future,” she said.
There are nine candidates running for Mayor and Council in South Amboy this
year, and Samuelson said that “all participants will have a fair chance to
express their views pertaining to local issues.
“The South Amboy Women’s Club, which is just starting-out, feels that this
community event is important for all residents and business owners alike,”
she said. “In the future, we’ll be organizing lectures, health-screenings
and other events.”
SOUTH AMBOY — What may be the only Candidates’ Debate for candidates for
Mayor and City Council in the Nov. 2 election will be held on Friday, Oct.
22, from 7 to 9 p.m. at Victory Hall at Sacred Heart Church, Washington Avenue.
The Debate will be hosted by the South Amboy Women’s Club, a new
organization headed by former Councilwoman Beverly Samuelson, which has been formed to
conduct charitable, civic, educational and cultural activities that help
revitalize the local business climate and quality-of-life in South Amboy.
“The Debate will be moderated by the N.J. League of Women Voters and
conducted in a professional manner about the issues only, without
personal-attacks,” Samuelson said in a prepared statement.
Sponsors include Amboy National Bank, the Amboy Beacon and other businesses
and individuals.
“The Debate’s purpose is to give residents and business-owners a chance to
hear for themselves the views of each candidate and their plans for the
future of South Amboy,” Samuelson said. “The League’s moderators are
professionals who’ll choose the questions asked about issues that pertain to this
city, based-upon careful research.
“The Debate is intended to give voters a clear understanding of where each
candidate stands on issues, and how they intend to resolve problems and move
South Amboy in the right direction in the future,” she said.
There are nine candidates running for Mayor and Council in South Amboy this
year, and Samuelson said that “all participants will have a fair chance to
express their views pertaining to local issues.
“The South Amboy Women’s Club, which is just starting-out, feels that this
community event is important for all residents and business owners alike,”
she said. “In the future, we’ll be organizing lectures, health-screenings
and other events.”
Amended Tab Vote Tonight
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Oct. 13, 2010)
PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill is
expected to remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of City Council
action scheduled to be taken today.
A public hearing on Amendments to the Transition Year 2010 Budget, used to
bridge the gap between the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Budget and the Calendar Year
2011 Budget, will be held at 7 p.m. at City Hall, High Street.
The state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) required that all municipal
spending plans be approved by governing bodies no later than Friday, Sept.
24, without an extension being granted by DCA.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing for tonight
with DCA’s approval was moved by Councilman William Petrick, seconded by
Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez and adopted 4-0 at the Council’s last meeting,
from which Council President Kenneth Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained then that the
Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include numbers
for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period
from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517
larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted
TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092.
The Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is $27,607,153 over six months, exactly
one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10
($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan
in some detail at the last Council meeting.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received
since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed,” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was
developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For
Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010
— and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to
$1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections
because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection
Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months,
compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation
Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a
full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 —
was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010 Budget, but now is
increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other
Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach has explained that the TY 2010 Budget “is not simply a one-year
budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during
certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because
those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance
payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted
at the Council’s last meeting.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget
that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a
little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start
working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges,
and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the
previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance
authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year
(Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth
Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first
municipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year
budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were
mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like
Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year
budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from
Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill,
instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall
of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy
Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24
months of state aid in 18 months.”
PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill is
expected to remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of City Council
action scheduled to be taken today.
A public hearing on Amendments to the Transition Year 2010 Budget, used to
bridge the gap between the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Budget and the Calendar Year
2011 Budget, will be held at 7 p.m. at City Hall, High Street.
The state Department of Community Affairs (DCA) required that all municipal
spending plans be approved by governing bodies no later than Friday, Sept.
24, without an extension being granted by DCA.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing for tonight
with DCA’s approval was moved by Councilman William Petrick, seconded by
Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez and adopted 4-0 at the Council’s last meeting,
from which Council President Kenneth Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained then that the
Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include numbers
for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period
from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517
larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted
TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092.
The Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is $27,607,153 over six months, exactly
one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10
($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan
in some detail at the last Council meeting.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received
since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed,” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was
developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For
Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010
— and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to
$1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections
because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection
Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months,
compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation
Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a
full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 —
was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010 Budget, but now is
increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other
Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach has explained that the TY 2010 Budget “is not simply a one-year
budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during
certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because
those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance
payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted
at the Council’s last meeting.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget
that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a
little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start
working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges,
and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the
previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance
authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year
(Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth
Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first
municipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year
budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were
mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like
Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year
budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from
Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill,
instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall
of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy
Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24
months of state aid in 18 months.”
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
NO BUDGETS
Perth Extension To Oct. 13
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill is expected to remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of City Council action scheduled to be taken next week.
A public hearing on Amendments to the Transition Year 2010 Budget, used to bridge the gap between the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Budget and the Calendar Year
2011 Budget, will be held on Wednesday, Oct. 13, at 7 p.m. at City Hall, High Street.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing was moved by Councilman William Petrick, seconded by Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez and adopted 4-0. Council President Kenneth Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained that the Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include numbers for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517 larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092.
The Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is $27,607,153 over six months, exactly one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10 ($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took a slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan in some detail.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed.” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010 — and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to $1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months, compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 — was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010, but now is increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach explained that the TY 2010 “is not simply a one-year budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges, and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year (Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first munic ipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill, instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24 months of state aid in 18 months.”
Getting philosophical, Fehrenbach spoke of “the continued discrimination in local government between public-safety and non-public-safety employees.
“Fifteen or 20 years ago, there was no division between them,” he said.
“In 1977, binding-arbitration created a group of prima-donnas and others.
That discrimination was continued by the Legislature, but you don’t have any control over that — that’s the design the Legislature has created.”
“That’s one of the most-important things we need to look-at,” Councilman Joel Pabon Sr. said. “I’m glad that it’s been brought-up. Someone needs to look at that to kind-of level it out.”
“With negotiated agreements for more time-off, you’ve lost the ability to provide services,” Fehrenbach said. “That’s where part of the problem exists. Once it’s gone, it’s essentially out-the-door.”
“If the money’s not there, how are we going to pay-for services?” Pabon noted. “That’s the bottom-line.”
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) PERTH AMBOY — The municipal portion of the local property-tax bill is expected to remain the same until the end of 2010 as a result of City Council action scheduled to be taken next week.
A public hearing on Amendments to the Transition Year 2010 Budget, used to bridge the gap between the Fiscal Year 2009-10 Budget and the Calendar Year
2011 Budget, will be held on Wednesday, Oct. 13, at 7 p.m. at City Hall, High Street.
The Resolution to adopt the Amendments and schedule the hearing was moved by Councilman William Petrick, seconded by Councilman Kenneth Gonzalez and adopted 4-0. Council President Kenneth Balut was absent.
Interim Business Administrator Gregory Fehrenbach explained that the Amendments would result in “no changes to revenues except to include numbers for grants, which are figures unavailable to us earlier.”
The overall size of the six-month TY 2010 Budget, which covers the period from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2010, totals $39,518,509, which is $262,517 larger than half of the FY 2009-10 Budget ($39,017,575).
The amended TY 2010 Budget is $1,238,417 higher than the previously-adopted TY 2010 Budget of $38,280,092.
The Amount To Be Raised By Taxes is $27,607,153 over six months, exactly one-half of the Amount To Be Raised By Taxes over one year for FY 2009-10 ($55,214,306).
Fehrenbach took a slightly-longer than an hour to go-over the spending plan in some detail.
“We made corrections to our estimates, adding grants that we’ve received since our previous numbers, but the tax-levy is fixed.” he said.
Rather than simply halving line-item accounts, the TY 2010 Budget as it was developed includes substantial increases for such things as the Reserve For Uncollected Taxes — from $998,726 for FY 2009-10 to $2,321,906 for TY 2010 — and the Reserve For Tax Appeals — from $185,000 for FY 2009-10 to $1,000,000 for TY 2010.
Apparently, the city is anticipating future difficulty in tax-collections because of the sputtering national economy, even-though the Tax-Collection Rate for FY 2009-10 was a healthy 94.8-percent.
General Liability Insurance for TY 2010 is $745,000 for six months, compared to $735,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10, and Workers Compensation Insurance for TY 2010 is $1,749,895 for six months, compared to $2,365,000 for a full year in FY 2009-10.
On the other hand, Urban Enterprise Zone (UEZ) — $484,624 in FY 2009-10 — was lowered to $15,000 in the unamended TY 2010, but now is increased to $517,099.
Emergency Management — $102,300 for Salaries & Wages and $6,500 for Other Expenses, or a total of $108,800, in FY 2009-10 — is zeroed-out in TY 2010.
Fehrenbach explained that the TY 2010 “is not simply a one-year budget cut-in-half” because it reflects expenses as they are incurred during certain times of the year.
“For example, there are no contributions to the pension system because those payments are made in April, but most of the general liability insurance payments are included because these are made during the last half,” he noted.
A transition budget “has no policy-initiatives” and “a capital budget that’s really of-no-consequence,” Fehrenbach said.
In these ways, he likened a transition budget to “two temporary
(three-month) budgets rolled-together.”
The big policy debates will come later, after what Fehrenbach called “a little relief for a short time.
“We want to get this (TY 2010) Budget behind us so that we can start working-on the Calendar Year 2011 Budget,” he said. “There will be challenges, and it’s not going to be easy. A two-percent cap is extremely-limiting.”
In an attempt to head-off a projected financial crisis down-the-road, the previous Council voted unanimously on May 26 to enact an Ordinance authorizing reversion from a Fiscal Year (July 1-June 30) Budget to a Calendar Year (Jan. 1-Dec. 31) Budget.
In reverting to Calendar Year budgeting from Fiscal Year budgeting, Perth Amboy followed the lead of neighboring South Amboy, which was the first munic ipality in the state to revert from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting in 2009 under a new state law giving municipalities which were mandated to change from Calendar Year budgeting to Fiscal Year budgeting — like Perth Amboy and South Amboy — the option of going-back to Fiscal Year budgeting.
Fehrenbach pointed out that one of the good things about reverting from Fiscal Year budgeting to Calendar Year budgeting will mean “a single tax-bill, instead of two, three or four.”
Also, “had the city not done-so, we would be facing an immediate shortfall of $5.2 million, due primarily to cutbacks in state aid, including Energy Receipts and Extraordinary Aid,” he said. “This way, the city can collect 24 months of state aid in 18 months.”
Getting philosophical, Fehrenbach spoke of “the continued discrimination in local government between public-safety and non-public-safety employees.
“Fifteen or 20 years ago, there was no division between them,” he said.
“In 1977, binding-arbitration created a group of prima-donnas and others.
That discrimination was continued by the Legislature, but you don’t have any control over that — that’s the design the Legislature has created.”
“That’s one of the most-important things we need to look-at,” Councilman Joel Pabon Sr. said. “I’m glad that it’s been brought-up. Someone needs to look at that to kind-of level it out.”
“With negotiated agreements for more time-off, you’ve lost the ability to provide services,” Fehrenbach said. “That’s where part of the problem exists. Once it’s gone, it’s essentially out-the-door.”
“If the money’s not there, how are we going to pay-for services?” Pabon noted. “That’s the bottom-line.”
S. Amboy Council Refuses To Adopt Tab
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon)
SOUTH AMBOY — A Special Meeting held early last week to adopt an amendment to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget and the Budget itself ended with the three City Council members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refusing to take any action on the spending plan.
After voting on a Resolution moved by Councilman William Schwarick, seconded by Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 3-0 to appoint Business Administrator Camille Tooker as Acting City Clerk, the Council adjourned into a closed-door executive session because “the Council has to be brought up-to-speed about some problems with negotiations,” Council President Fred Henry explained.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running in the Nov. 2 election — were absent.
At 6:30 p.m., Henry came-out to inform the audience that the Council would be out for “another five minutes” because “we’re waiting for a call from our Auditor.
“We don’t have a professional here now,” he added.
“That’s for-sure,” someone in the audience called-out.
The three Council members attending the second Special Meeting emerged 23 minutes later with Mayor John O’Leary and took their seats.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Noble declared.
“I concur,” Schwarick added. “There’s a decision on additional revenue coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from under us.”
O’Leary interjected to correct Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant site,’” he said.
“At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community
Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue source was not accepted,” the Mayor stated.
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Henry said. “”We had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not coming-about,” he said. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South
Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
O’Leary castigated DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to, interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties” and “The O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy Aggregates.
At a previous Special Meeting held six days earlier, the Council conducted a scheduled public hearing on amendments to the CY 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576, taking no action at that time except to schedule another Special Meeting.
The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on the average home.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance O’Neill were absent from both Special Meetings.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
But City Auditor Gary Higgins said at the first Special Meeting that “within the past hour at-most,” certain unnamed “developers” had provided city officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an additional “$800,000”
in new revenues.
“If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this calendar-year,” he stated.
Higgins indicated that a DCA official would have to approve the “other revenues” in order for the city to include them in the CY 2010 Budget.
“Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” Council President Fred Henry stated at that time. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d allow us to do it.”
“It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need so we can move-forward,” O’Leary stated at the first Special Meeting.
A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon after the first Special Meeting that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s fiscal problems.
The Beacon has obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of $800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
According to a Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State Business Gateway Service, Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a “foreign (Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27, the date of the second Special Meeting.
At the second Special Meeting, some residents expressed support for the Council members who declined to vote for any CY 2010 Budget that did not include the $800,000 in anticipated revenue.
“I have to commend you gentlemen for doing what you did,” Nancy McLaughlin said. “It took guts.”
“First, let me assure you that I did NOT call DCA,” Eileen Ryan stated.
“When I did, I told you I did.”
She went-on to say, “I respect these two gentlemen (Noble and Schwarick) for being-here. Could the others have just had a flu or something?”
But Ryan insisted that “somebody’s giving you a story.”
Independent mayoral candidate Mary O’Connor challenged O’Leary and the Council to produce a copy of the contract “between O’Neill and the city.”
“Sure, just fill-out a Right-to-Know,” Henry respomded.
“The contract is between the contract-purchaser and the Redevelopment Agency, not the city,” O’Leary added.
According to the amendments introduced the previous week, 38 of 49 line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be decreased.
The first Special Meeting was scheduled despite the fact that Henry had announced at the Council’s Sept. 1 meeting that a public hearing would be held on amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget at the Council’s Sept. 15 meeting.
The calling of a Special Meeting to adopt amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget was specifically rejected when it was suggested at the Sept. 1 meeting by former Councilman Stanley Jankowski, now a Board of Education member.
“You can’t pass it (the Budget) that night,” Jankowski insisted at that time. “You have to have two readings.”
“They can do it the same night,” attorney Thomas Lanza, sitting-in for his brother, John Lanza, stated. No legal counsel has attended the two Special Meetings.
“Why not just have a Special Meeting on the Budget?” Jankowski had asked.
“You could be sitting here for hours.”
“Hopefully, that’s not going to happen,” Henry said, before moving-on to another subect and then adjourning the Sept. 1 meeting.
Holding Special Meetings on a Tuesday and a Monday precluded most of the public from knowing about the hearing and about the coming increase in local taxes because reporters for the two out-of-county daily newspapers that usually cover the meetings were absent from the previous regular Council meeting, and reporters for the two weekly newspapers that cover Council meetings do not publish on Tuesdays. However, one of the reporters for an out-of-county daily newspaper that usually covers the meetings was present for the second Special Meeting.
In addition to the eight-page Budget Resolution attached to the first Special Meeting’s agenda, Higgins provided a 20-page Budget Presentation which he said “complied with” the “Best Practices Checklist” which he said was due to be submitted to state officials by Oct. 1.
Some numbers included in the Higgins document differed from those in the Budget Resolution, including the amount to be raised by local taxes, showing an increase of $694,138, from $7,157,863 to $7,852,001.
Tooker had noted at the Council’s last regular meeting that DCA required the final CY 2010 Budget to be approved by the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24.
There was no specific mention of an extension being granted by DCA, although Higgins said, “We’ll be working on it (the Budget) the next couple of days.”
At the Sept. 1 meeting, Ryan indicated that she was told by someone at DCA named “Amelia” that “DCA made several requests to the City of South Amboy about items in the Budget that they needed more information about, and there was no response whatsoever from the City of South Amboy.”
But Tooker denied Ryan’s information, including the identity of the person reviewing the CY 2010 Budget, stating that “the person who’s reviewing our Budget is a male.”
However, the Business Administrator later stated that the DCA person doing the review was named “Tina.”
SOUTH AMBOY — A Special Meeting held early last week to adopt an amendment to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget and the Budget itself ended with the three City Council members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refusing to take any action on the spending plan.
After voting on a Resolution moved by Councilman William Schwarick, seconded by Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 3-0 to appoint Business Administrator Camille Tooker as Acting City Clerk, the Council adjourned into a closed-door executive session because “the Council has to be brought up-to-speed about some problems with negotiations,” Council President Fred Henry explained.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running in the Nov. 2 election — were absent.
At 6:30 p.m., Henry came-out to inform the audience that the Council would be out for “another five minutes” because “we’re waiting for a call from our Auditor.
“We don’t have a professional here now,” he added.
“That’s for-sure,” someone in the audience called-out.
The three Council members attending the second Special Meeting emerged 23 minutes later with Mayor John O’Leary and took their seats.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Noble declared.
“I concur,” Schwarick added. “There’s a decision on additional revenue coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from under us.”
O’Leary interjected to correct Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant site,’” he said.
“At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community
Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue source was not accepted,” the Mayor stated.
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Henry said. “”We had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not coming-about,” he said. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South
Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
O’Leary castigated DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to, interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties” and “The O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy Aggregates.
At a previous Special Meeting held six days earlier, the Council conducted a scheduled public hearing on amendments to the CY 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576, taking no action at that time except to schedule another Special Meeting.
The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on the average home.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance O’Neill were absent from both Special Meetings.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to $7,852,001.
But City Auditor Gary Higgins said at the first Special Meeting that “within the past hour at-most,” certain unnamed “developers” had provided city officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an additional “$800,000”
in new revenues.
“If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this calendar-year,” he stated.
Higgins indicated that a DCA official would have to approve the “other revenues” in order for the city to include them in the CY 2010 Budget.
“Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” Council President Fred Henry stated at that time. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d allow us to do it.”
“It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need so we can move-forward,” O’Leary stated at the first Special Meeting.
A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon after the first Special Meeting that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s fiscal problems.
The Beacon has obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of $800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
According to a Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State Business Gateway Service, Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a “foreign (Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27, the date of the second Special Meeting.
At the second Special Meeting, some residents expressed support for the Council members who declined to vote for any CY 2010 Budget that did not include the $800,000 in anticipated revenue.
“I have to commend you gentlemen for doing what you did,” Nancy McLaughlin said. “It took guts.”
“First, let me assure you that I did NOT call DCA,” Eileen Ryan stated.
“When I did, I told you I did.”
She went-on to say, “I respect these two gentlemen (Noble and Schwarick) for being-here. Could the others have just had a flu or something?”
But Ryan insisted that “somebody’s giving you a story.”
Independent mayoral candidate Mary O’Connor challenged O’Leary and the Council to produce a copy of the contract “between O’Neill and the city.”
“Sure, just fill-out a Right-to-Know,” Henry respomded.
“The contract is between the contract-purchaser and the Redevelopment Agency, not the city,” O’Leary added.
According to the amendments introduced the previous week, 38 of 49 line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be decreased.
The first Special Meeting was scheduled despite the fact that Henry had announced at the Council’s Sept. 1 meeting that a public hearing would be held on amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget at the Council’s Sept. 15 meeting.
The calling of a Special Meeting to adopt amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget was specifically rejected when it was suggested at the Sept. 1 meeting by former Councilman Stanley Jankowski, now a Board of Education member.
“You can’t pass it (the Budget) that night,” Jankowski insisted at that time. “You have to have two readings.”
“They can do it the same night,” attorney Thomas Lanza, sitting-in for his brother, John Lanza, stated. No legal counsel has attended the two Special Meetings.
“Why not just have a Special Meeting on the Budget?” Jankowski had asked.
“You could be sitting here for hours.”
“Hopefully, that’s not going to happen,” Henry said, before moving-on to another subect and then adjourning the Sept. 1 meeting.
Holding Special Meetings on a Tuesday and a Monday precluded most of the public from knowing about the hearing and about the coming increase in local taxes because reporters for the two out-of-county daily newspapers that usually cover the meetings were absent from the previous regular Council meeting, and reporters for the two weekly newspapers that cover Council meetings do not publish on Tuesdays. However, one of the reporters for an out-of-county daily newspaper that usually covers the meetings was present for the second Special Meeting.
In addition to the eight-page Budget Resolution attached to the first Special Meeting’s agenda, Higgins provided a 20-page Budget Presentation which he said “complied with” the “Best Practices Checklist” which he said was due to be submitted to state officials by Oct. 1.
Some numbers included in the Higgins document differed from those in the Budget Resolution, including the amount to be raised by local taxes, showing an increase of $694,138, from $7,157,863 to $7,852,001.
Tooker had noted at the Council’s last regular meeting that DCA required the final CY 2010 Budget to be approved by the Mayor and Council no later than Friday, Sept. 24.
There was no specific mention of an extension being granted by DCA, although Higgins said, “We’ll be working on it (the Budget) the next couple of days.”
At the Sept. 1 meeting, Ryan indicated that she was told by someone at DCA named “Amelia” that “DCA made several requests to the City of South Amboy about items in the Budget that they needed more information about, and there was no response whatsoever from the City of South Amboy.”
But Tooker denied Ryan’s information, including the identity of the person reviewing the CY 2010 Budget, stating that “the person who’s reviewing our Budget is a male.”
However, the Business Administrator later stated that the DCA person doing the review was named “Tina.”
No Vas, Ramos Defense
By Jim Shea
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) NEWARK — Defense counsels Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne, representing former Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas, and Jerome Ballarotto, representing Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos, did not offer any rebuttal after U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and Jennifer Kramer rested the government’s case.
U.S. vs. Joseph Vas and Melvin Ramos, with U.S. District Court Judge Susan Wigenton presiding, was scheduled to continue with closing arguments early this week in Room 5C of the King Building and U.S. District Courthouse after the jury was dismissed last Tuesday afternoon.
Among those taking the witness-stand last week were former Purchasing Agent Ronald Mascenik, Vas political advisor Raymond Geneske, FBI Special Agent Edward Quinn and Federal Election Commission (FEC) General Counsel Mark Shonkwiler.
Excerpts from the testimony follow.
“Are you aware that Vas ran for Congress? You gave him money,” Kramer began questioning Mascenik.
“I ran into Ray Geneske; he was active in the Vas campaign, and I knew him for four or five years. I said I could give $500, but I’ll have to check.
Geneske said, ‘I’ll give you the money, no problem.’”
Mascenik acknowledged a check Kramer showed him dated May 17, 2006 for $1,500, with his signature.
“Mr. Geneske approached me a few days later and gave me cash, and I then gave him a check. I made out a check for $2,100 on June 1, 2006, another check for the Vas for Congress campaign. There were additional checks for me and my wife.”
Howe asked Geneske, “Have you ever been convicted?”
“I pleaded guilty for giving to a federal campaign in the name of others, in 2009.”
“What campaign?”
“Vas 2006 campaign.”
“Who gave you cash?”
“Eduardo Trujillo.”
“Other than Eduardo Trujillo and the straw-donors, who else was involved?”
Howe asked.
“Vas,” Geneske replied.
“Did you agree to work with federal authorities?”
“I agreed to plead to money-laundering third-degree, and my obligation is to tell the truth.”
“What was the sentence?”
“Three years probation, plus money to be paid.”
Geneske said he told Vas, who decided to run against former Assembly Speaker Albio Sires for Congress, that “just to be competitive,” he must spend
“$2 million.”
“Were you aware that New Jersey placed limits on contributions?”
“Yes. Eddie Trujillo gave me $5,000 cash at my home. I distributed it to the straw-donors. I give them cash; they give me a check. I gave the checks to the (Campaign) Treasurer, Mel Ramos.”
Howe showed Geneske several exhibits of checks made-out to “Vas for Congress,” and the witness identified them. One was a check for $1,000 from Raymond Geneske.
“I reimbursed myself,” he said.
Geneske said that later, “I got $25,000 from Edddie Trujillo at my home, in an envelope,” and he handled it the same way.
“I told Vas the very-next day that Eddie had come-through with a contribution. He was happy to receive it. The campaign needed money desperately. The polls showed the Mayor was ahead, the campaign was tightening, and we agreed to use the straw-donor method.
“At any time, did Vas tell you to return the money?”
“Vas said ‘no.’”
Howe showed more checks to Geneske.
“I gave them to the Treasurer: At the headquarters, I had $5,000 left, and the Mayor suggested that I use the remaining money to get out the vote. The Mayor was very-interested.”
Turning to the DeKalb Avenue property, Howe asked Geneske if he were “aware of” it.
“Through (former Chief Housing Inspector) Carlos Serrano, I learned that the Mayor owned the property,” he replied. “I went to the Mayor’s Office because there were aspects of this that bothered me.
“I asked him, ‘What the f--- are you doing?’ This happened around the time of the Council vote. I said, ‘This might be unethical.’ Vas was adamant; he said everything was above-board.”
“Who dealt with RCA (Regional Contribution Agreement) funds?” Howe asked.
“The Mayor,” Geneske replied.
“Vas made a promise. In the fall of 2005, he promised $3.5 million dollars in RCA funds to Eddie Trujillo. Vas said he’d do everything he could to get Eddie Trujillo the $3.5 million for the King Plaza project.”
“Did Mr. Trujillo, in fact, express reservations about the Kings Plaza Project?” Zegas asked. “Didn’t Trujillo, in fact, get no funds?”
“Yes,” Geneske replied.
Turning to DeKalb Avenue, Zegas asked why Geneske thought “Vas’s prior ownership was political dynamite.”
“He was my friend. From the outside, it looked like it needed repairs.”
“How did you knew the Mayor once owned the property?”
“Carlos Serrano, around June 13 or 14, told me that Vas owned the property. I told the Mayor this was immoral, illegal and unethical.”
After prodding by Zegas, Geneske said, “I have no doubt Vas’s comment was that it was all legal.”
“Were you aware if Mr. (former Councilman Frank) Sinatra had an interest with the new owners?”
“No.”
“Were your comments on the City Council coming from having read the newspapers, and nothing of your personal knowledge?”
“Yes, from the newspapers.”
“Trujillo did not get the $3.5 million; do you know why?” Howe asked Geneske.
“A transfer was going-on within COAH (state Council On Affordable Housing).”
“COAH was in-suspension?”
“Yes.”
Called by Kramer, Quinn said that after obtaining a search-warrant, he and another FBI agent went to Vas’s High Street residence “shortly after 7 a.m.” on Dec. 4, 2008, knocked on the door, and Vas came down for a two-hour interview.
“He was not arrested, it was voluntary, he was pleasant, he was willing to talk about DeKalb, he was aware that DeKalb was part of a criminal investigation,” Quinn said. “Vas said his intentions were as an investment property, and he planned on holding-onto the property.
“Vas said he may have had a brief discussion with (purchaser Evangelos) Samouhos, but “said he didn’t have any conversations with him regarding RCA funds.
“Vas said he gave no assurances; this came up as a Resolution for the Council in the normal manner,” Quinn said. “Vas said he had no involvement. He said that he was aware of a $90,000 disbursement, but only became aware of it recently.”
Quinn said Vas told him that he “was not aware of any confrontation”
regarding his appointment (of former Assistant Personnel Director David Benyola as Acting Business Administrator for a day), and “didn’t recall having said, ‘(Chief Financial Officer Jill) Goldy and (former Business Administrator
Donald) Perlee don’t know what they’re talking-about.’”
Vas also told him that “he had no conversation with (former Human Services Director Jeffrey) Gumbs” about it, Quinn said.
Kramer showed Quinn exhibits of bank deposits for “Vas for Congress” from the DeKalb property sale.
On cross-examination, Zegas questioned the propriety of a 7 a.m. visit, if “everything” was included in his report, and if Vas was “read his rights.”
“We didn’t include in the report that Mr. Vas appeared at the door with a towel,” Quinn said.
“Although Mr. Vas was a target, you didn’t read him his rights.”
“He was not being arrested, so we wouldn’t read him his rights.”
Last Tuesday, Kramer asked Shonkwiler about a Campaign Treasurer’s responsibilities.
“The Treasurer takes-on a responsibility: the Treasurer monitors what’s going on; he must file forms,” Shonkwiler said. There’ll be a schedule of disbursements, and the Treasurer has the sole statutory responsibility.”
Shonkwiler said that since 2002, the limit on campaign contributions has been $2,100 for the primary election and $2,100 for the general election, per candidate, per election.
The prosecution rested its case, and Zegas and Ballarotto both moved for dismissal, which the Judge rejected.
“We will not be calling any witnesses,” Zegas and Ballarotto stated. Both Vas and Ramos agreed that they would not testify on their own behalf.
“The defense will call no witnesses,” Wigenton announced. “The jury is free to go. You’re going to return on Monday, and you’ll get instructions on the law. You will not have access to your cellphones.”
From The Editor’s Desk
(Editorial, Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) At a Special Meeting held early last week to adopt an amendment to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget and the Budget itself, the three South Amboy City Council members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refused to take any action on the spending plan.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running in the Nov. 2 election — were absent. Why weren’t they present at a Special Meeting they had voted to hold? Also absent were City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance O’Neill.
The Council members who attended went into a closed-door executive session and emerged 23 minutes later with Mayor John O’Leary.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Councilman Mark Noble declared.
“I concur,” Councilman William Schwarick stated. “There’s a decision on additional revenue coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from under us.”
Mayor O’Leary interjected to correct Councilman Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant site,’” the Mayor said. “At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue source was not accepted.”
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Council President Fred Henry, the Democratic nominee for Mayor, said. “”We had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not coming-about,” he continued. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
Mayor O’Leary went-on to castigate DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to, interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties”
and “The O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy Aggregates.
The Mayor continued attacking state officials for creating the 11th-hour circumstances the Council found itself in because of state-aid cutbacks and stringent rules on anticipating revenues, never explaining why local officials were so-late with the CY 2010 Budget, which was amended to increase local taxes by another $722,576, for a total $268 tax-hike on the average home.
Without knowing it, Council President Henry might have made the most-profound statement: “Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds.”
A source familiar with municipal budgeting told us that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
We’ve obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of $800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
A Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State Business Gateway Service says that Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a “foreign
(Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27, the same day as the Special Meeting!
Under those circumstances, is there any wonder why DCA didn’t let South Amboy anticipate those funds?
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) NEWARK — Defense counsels Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne, representing former Perth Amboy Mayor Joseph Vas, and Jerome Ballarotto, representing Mayor’s Aide Melvin Ramos, did not offer any rebuttal after U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and Jennifer Kramer rested the government’s case.
U.S. vs. Joseph Vas and Melvin Ramos, with U.S. District Court Judge Susan Wigenton presiding, was scheduled to continue with closing arguments early this week in Room 5C of the King Building and U.S. District Courthouse after the jury was dismissed last Tuesday afternoon.
Among those taking the witness-stand last week were former Purchasing Agent Ronald Mascenik, Vas political advisor Raymond Geneske, FBI Special Agent Edward Quinn and Federal Election Commission (FEC) General Counsel Mark Shonkwiler.
Excerpts from the testimony follow.
“Are you aware that Vas ran for Congress? You gave him money,” Kramer began questioning Mascenik.
“I ran into Ray Geneske; he was active in the Vas campaign, and I knew him for four or five years. I said I could give $500, but I’ll have to check.
Geneske said, ‘I’ll give you the money, no problem.’”
Mascenik acknowledged a check Kramer showed him dated May 17, 2006 for $1,500, with his signature.
“Mr. Geneske approached me a few days later and gave me cash, and I then gave him a check. I made out a check for $2,100 on June 1, 2006, another check for the Vas for Congress campaign. There were additional checks for me and my wife.”
Howe asked Geneske, “Have you ever been convicted?”
“I pleaded guilty for giving to a federal campaign in the name of others, in 2009.”
“What campaign?”
“Vas 2006 campaign.”
“Who gave you cash?”
“Eduardo Trujillo.”
“Other than Eduardo Trujillo and the straw-donors, who else was involved?”
Howe asked.
“Vas,” Geneske replied.
“Did you agree to work with federal authorities?”
“I agreed to plead to money-laundering third-degree, and my obligation is to tell the truth.”
“What was the sentence?”
“Three years probation, plus money to be paid.”
Geneske said he told Vas, who decided to run against former Assembly Speaker Albio Sires for Congress, that “just to be competitive,” he must spend
“$2 million.”
“Were you aware that New Jersey placed limits on contributions?”
“Yes. Eddie Trujillo gave me $5,000 cash at my home. I distributed it to the straw-donors. I give them cash; they give me a check. I gave the checks to the (Campaign) Treasurer, Mel Ramos.”
Howe showed Geneske several exhibits of checks made-out to “Vas for Congress,” and the witness identified them. One was a check for $1,000 from Raymond Geneske.
“I reimbursed myself,” he said.
Geneske said that later, “I got $25,000 from Edddie Trujillo at my home, in an envelope,” and he handled it the same way.
“I told Vas the very-next day that Eddie had come-through with a contribution. He was happy to receive it. The campaign needed money desperately. The polls showed the Mayor was ahead, the campaign was tightening, and we agreed to use the straw-donor method.
“At any time, did Vas tell you to return the money?”
“Vas said ‘no.’”
Howe showed more checks to Geneske.
“I gave them to the Treasurer: At the headquarters, I had $5,000 left, and the Mayor suggested that I use the remaining money to get out the vote. The Mayor was very-interested.”
Turning to the DeKalb Avenue property, Howe asked Geneske if he were “aware of” it.
“Through (former Chief Housing Inspector) Carlos Serrano, I learned that the Mayor owned the property,” he replied. “I went to the Mayor’s Office because there were aspects of this that bothered me.
“I asked him, ‘What the f--- are you doing?’ This happened around the time of the Council vote. I said, ‘This might be unethical.’ Vas was adamant; he said everything was above-board.”
“Who dealt with RCA (Regional Contribution Agreement) funds?” Howe asked.
“The Mayor,” Geneske replied.
“Vas made a promise. In the fall of 2005, he promised $3.5 million dollars in RCA funds to Eddie Trujillo. Vas said he’d do everything he could to get Eddie Trujillo the $3.5 million for the King Plaza project.”
“Did Mr. Trujillo, in fact, express reservations about the Kings Plaza Project?” Zegas asked. “Didn’t Trujillo, in fact, get no funds?”
“Yes,” Geneske replied.
Turning to DeKalb Avenue, Zegas asked why Geneske thought “Vas’s prior ownership was political dynamite.”
“He was my friend. From the outside, it looked like it needed repairs.”
“How did you knew the Mayor once owned the property?”
“Carlos Serrano, around June 13 or 14, told me that Vas owned the property. I told the Mayor this was immoral, illegal and unethical.”
After prodding by Zegas, Geneske said, “I have no doubt Vas’s comment was that it was all legal.”
“Were you aware if Mr. (former Councilman Frank) Sinatra had an interest with the new owners?”
“No.”
“Were your comments on the City Council coming from having read the newspapers, and nothing of your personal knowledge?”
“Yes, from the newspapers.”
“Trujillo did not get the $3.5 million; do you know why?” Howe asked Geneske.
“A transfer was going-on within COAH (state Council On Affordable Housing).”
“COAH was in-suspension?”
“Yes.”
Called by Kramer, Quinn said that after obtaining a search-warrant, he and another FBI agent went to Vas’s High Street residence “shortly after 7 a.m.” on Dec. 4, 2008, knocked on the door, and Vas came down for a two-hour interview.
“He was not arrested, it was voluntary, he was pleasant, he was willing to talk about DeKalb, he was aware that DeKalb was part of a criminal investigation,” Quinn said. “Vas said his intentions were as an investment property, and he planned on holding-onto the property.
“Vas said he may have had a brief discussion with (purchaser Evangelos) Samouhos, but “said he didn’t have any conversations with him regarding RCA funds.
“Vas said he gave no assurances; this came up as a Resolution for the Council in the normal manner,” Quinn said. “Vas said he had no involvement. He said that he was aware of a $90,000 disbursement, but only became aware of it recently.”
Quinn said Vas told him that he “was not aware of any confrontation”
regarding his appointment (of former Assistant Personnel Director David Benyola as Acting Business Administrator for a day), and “didn’t recall having said, ‘(Chief Financial Officer Jill) Goldy and (former Business Administrator
Donald) Perlee don’t know what they’re talking-about.’”
Vas also told him that “he had no conversation with (former Human Services Director Jeffrey) Gumbs” about it, Quinn said.
Kramer showed Quinn exhibits of bank deposits for “Vas for Congress” from the DeKalb property sale.
On cross-examination, Zegas questioned the propriety of a 7 a.m. visit, if “everything” was included in his report, and if Vas was “read his rights.”
“We didn’t include in the report that Mr. Vas appeared at the door with a towel,” Quinn said.
“Although Mr. Vas was a target, you didn’t read him his rights.”
“He was not being arrested, so we wouldn’t read him his rights.”
Last Tuesday, Kramer asked Shonkwiler about a Campaign Treasurer’s responsibilities.
“The Treasurer takes-on a responsibility: the Treasurer monitors what’s going on; he must file forms,” Shonkwiler said. There’ll be a schedule of disbursements, and the Treasurer has the sole statutory responsibility.”
Shonkwiler said that since 2002, the limit on campaign contributions has been $2,100 for the primary election and $2,100 for the general election, per candidate, per election.
The prosecution rested its case, and Zegas and Ballarotto both moved for dismissal, which the Judge rejected.
“We will not be calling any witnesses,” Zegas and Ballarotto stated. Both Vas and Ramos agreed that they would not testify on their own behalf.
“The defense will call no witnesses,” Wigenton announced. “The jury is free to go. You’re going to return on Monday, and you’ll get instructions on the law. You will not have access to your cellphones.”
From The Editor’s Desk
(Editorial, Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon) At a Special Meeting held early last week to adopt an amendment to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget and the Budget itself, the three South Amboy City Council members in-attendance — the barest number for a quorum — refused to take any action on the spending plan.
Councilmen Donald Applegate and Joseph Connors — both of whom are running in the Nov. 2 election — were absent. Why weren’t they present at a Special Meeting they had voted to hold? Also absent were City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance O’Neill.
The Council members who attended went into a closed-door executive session and emerged 23 minutes later with Mayor John O’Leary.
“I feel personally that I cannot vote to adopt this Budget because it’s not fair to the taxpayers of South Amboy,” Councilman Mark Noble declared.
“I concur,” Councilman William Schwarick stated. “There’s a decision on additional revenue coming from the state. We had a deal with a developer who agreed to purchase Amboy Aggregates for $800,000, but at 4 p.m., the rug was pulled-out from under us.”
Mayor O’Leary interjected to correct Councilman Schwarick’s statement.
“O’Neill Properties, the contract-purchaser for Amboy Aggregates, also had signed a contract to purchase one acre next to it known as ‘the restaurant site,’” the Mayor said. “At 1 p.m., we had an agreement from DCA (state Department of Community Affairs) Commissioner Thomas Neff, but at 4 p.m., this anticipated revenue source was not accepted.”
“Obviously, we have no vote for the Budget tonight,” Council President Fred Henry, the Democratic nominee for Mayor, said. “”We had a deal already-made, everything was set, and then apparently an anonymous call was made that this was not a real LLC (Limited Liability Company).
“We’re fighting a tax-increase, and for whatever reason, it’s not coming-about,” he continued. “We’re talking only about one acre of land where the (South Amboy) Boat Club was. A deal was made, but at 4 p.m., we received a call that the deal was off.”
The Council’s inaction subjected the three members in-attendance to the possible assessment of individual $25-a-day fines against them by DCA.
Mayor O’Leary went-on to castigate DCA officials for not accepting what he referred-to, interchangably, as “O’Neill Companies,” “O’Neill Properties”
and “The O’Neill Group,” a Pennsylvania-based redevelopment firm specializing in contaminated properties and the redeveloper of the former NL Industries site in neighboring Sayreville, whom he said is the contract-purchaser of Amboy Aggregates.
The Mayor continued attacking state officials for creating the 11th-hour circumstances the Council found itself in because of state-aid cutbacks and stringent rules on anticipating revenues, never explaining why local officials were so-late with the CY 2010 Budget, which was amended to increase local taxes by another $722,576, for a total $268 tax-hike on the average home.
Without knowing it, Council President Henry might have made the most-profound statement: “Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds.”
A source familiar with municipal budgeting told us that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers “only if there’s signed contracts.”
We’ve obtained a copy of a two-page Agreement signed by Redevelopment Agency Executive Director Eric Chubenko and Richard Heany, President of Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP, providing for the payment of $800,000 to the City of South Amboy by Dec. 15 for the one-acre parcel as part of a $3.8 million property purchase.
However, an “escape-clause” in the contract allows the entity to withdraw from the Agreement “at it’s (sic) discretion,” and to “compel” the Agency
to sell the property and return “the deposit.”
A Business Entity Status Report provided by the N.J. State Business Gateway Service says that Amboy Waterfront Acquisition Associates LP is a “foreign
(Delaware) Limited Partnership” (not an LLC), which filed on Sept. 27, the same day as the Special Meeting!
Under those circumstances, is there any wonder why DCA didn’t let South Amboy anticipate those funds?
Junel’s Life Of Survival
By Jenni Carlock
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon)
We go through life, beginning at birth, learning to walk and talk. From our earliest memories as children, we talk about future plans: “I want to be a nurse, or a firefighter, or a Navy medic, or a accountant, or I want to be Mayor or President, or I want to be an accountant, or I want to be a sales rep, or a chef or, in Junel’s case, I want to be a Director of Admissions for a Healthcare Facility.”
All of our thoughts, plans, goals and aspirations are geared toward the wonderful things that life has to offer us, and the things that we have to strive for, the things that we learn from society around us, from our families, from our early work place what we want for our future.
Never does it cross our minds to include in our goals and aspirations during our planning stages: I want to be a cancer patient and a cancer survivor.
Junel Hutchinson is a 40-year-old black female, born in New York, raised in North Carolina, who came to New Jersey in 1991. She’s a single mother of a 17-year-old high school female; she graduated from Philip Junior College of Business in Raleigh, NC, with an Associate’s Degree in Business Administration, and she started working at Aristacare at Alameda Center when it was still Perth Amboy Nursing Home.
Now, I know Junel will shake her head when she hears me say that when I started there, she was a “spoiled little brat.” Well, with much bonding with us (and mostly, much personal growth within herself), she decided what was the right path. Eventually, after being passed-over twice, Junel became Admissions Director for AristaCare at Alameda. She quickly grew into a woman of skill and leadership, taking the initiative to learn to be a better person, and people soon were looking-up to her for her guidance, support, knowledge and leadership skills, including her own family. She set an impressive example for her daughter and her family both local and afar.
The amazing thing about life is that we face challenges as they come-along to us. We sometimes try to anticipate the future, like putting extra money away for a rainy day, or putting money away for our children’s education or for a future vacation. When, I ask you, do we put money away for an illness such as cancer?
In June of 2008, Junel (we refer to each-other as “Sistah,” even-though I’m white, but we have that family bond) called me to say that she was going to have a sonogram of her breast because the doctor felt something there during her annual GYN consultation. Well, guess who went with her! Sonogram and ultrasound was done, and the news was then apparent, we tried to ignore thinking-about it as only a lump, probably a false alarm, probably an enlarged lymph node. But it was indeed positive for breast cancer.
What does one say? What does one do when the person you are so-close-to is diagnosed with this? Well, let me tell you. After the initial shock and going through the normal phases of grieving (denial, anger, bargaining, acceptance), you have to jump into action.
Ladies, the time from when you are diagnosed to when you begin treatment is
imperative. The cancer, given the opportunity, will spread quickly from
the breast because it is so vascular (full of blood vessels and fatty tissue).
Junel Hutchinson is one of the most-amazing women I’ve ever known. During the diagnosis phase, I jumped into-action to get tests and doctors and results in-order to start treatment. I had the easy job. The hardest part of all was for Junel to hear the word “cancer,” especially since we work in the medical field, admitting patients for various levels of treatment from orthopaedic to cardiac to cancer, and we’ve both seen the outcomes of all.
Mind you that the tumor in her breast was very-small, but that didn’t matter. When you hear the word “cancer,” your life flashes in-front of you because we hear all the stories, both good and bad. Yet, when it comes to you, will you initially be able to focus-upon the good?
Junel sought-out her inner self, her inner strength; support of her friends, family and loved ones, and kept an open spirit and mind. Yet, she didn’t air her woes to everyone. Her family was the immediate support, and her co-workers were amazing as-well. In fact we consider all our co-workers at Alameda as our family.
I remember days of taking Junel for her tests, and everyone would come to our office to give her support and even shed a few tears. Junel sought-out her strength, not only from inside her own desire to beat this disease, but she also received it from those who cared-about her.
When Junel was ready, she spoke-up to a female patient of ours who refused to have treatment for her breast cancer. She was afraid of the treatments, of what she heard of hair-loss and illness. Well, let me tell you, as vain as Junel can be, as she is a diva, she right-then-and-there pulled-off her wig and showed the patient that her hair was growing-back, and “even betta than before!”
Breast cancer is just one of the cancers we face. From pure experience, Junel was able to advise a social worker from one of our local hospitals that send us patients for rehab what to do to protect herself from infection during chemo, what to look-out-for during radiation, and what “female” symptoms might occur.
Junel was trying to keep her disease private, knowing the discriminations one faces — for her, even more of a challenge, being a woman, being black, and having cancer — yet, she wrote a testimony on Facebook to educate others; mind you, not only for women of color, but for all women and all men, too.
This was an amazing feat, for she was afraid of the public stigma associated with “breast cancer.”
Junel did have breast surgery, a procedure called a modified mastectomy (that name, in-itself, is scary as all heck). They removed the tumor and surrounding tissue, and some of the lymph nodes, for testing. She also went-through many weeks of chemotherapy to ensure that the cancer didn’t grow-back in
the surrounding tissues. Junel had a port-a-cath inserted because she has
really-bad veins. I tell you this from personal experience, as any time she needed regular bloodwork before the diagnosis, she would call me and say, “Hi, Sistah, watcha doing? Oh, I need you to come and draw my blood because they can’t get it at this clinic after three freaking attempts!” The port-a-cath remains in her right chest, and I flush it once-a-month so that she can have her monthly levels done.
I have to say that I admire her even-more for this because the port is a mo nthly reminder of the 18 months of treatments she went-through. Despite the emotional struggles Junel faces: occasionally discomfort, not to mention the effect it initially had post-operatively on her intimate life, she came-through it like the strong woman that she is. Her fiance Zaraca Jackson also went-through the same grieving process, experiencing sorrow, yet never giving-up hope. We all need that from our loved ones.
Cancer shows no discrimination of race, color, gender or sexual orientation. Even the smallest of lumps that you discover must get checked-out.
Junel Hutchinson is not only my “sistah,” she’s my hero. I admire her for all her strength, experience and spirituality. Now, Sistah, you are the word of support to all. I love you, Sistah!
Our strength lies not only within ourselves, but is supported by those around us. If you know someone with cancer, give them a hug and let them know that they’re loved, that they’re special, that they’re not just a disease, but indeed a human being.
Jenni Carlock, RN, BSN, is Director of Case Management for AristaCare at Alameda, Elm Street, Perth Amboy.
(Reprinted from Oct. 6, 2010 Amboy Beacon)
We go through life, beginning at birth, learning to walk and talk. From our earliest memories as children, we talk about future plans: “I want to be a nurse, or a firefighter, or a Navy medic, or a accountant, or I want to be Mayor or President, or I want to be an accountant, or I want to be a sales rep, or a chef or, in Junel’s case, I want to be a Director of Admissions for a Healthcare Facility.”
All of our thoughts, plans, goals and aspirations are geared toward the wonderful things that life has to offer us, and the things that we have to strive for, the things that we learn from society around us, from our families, from our early work place what we want for our future.
Never does it cross our minds to include in our goals and aspirations during our planning stages: I want to be a cancer patient and a cancer survivor.
Junel Hutchinson is a 40-year-old black female, born in New York, raised in North Carolina, who came to New Jersey in 1991. She’s a single mother of a 17-year-old high school female; she graduated from Philip Junior College of Business in Raleigh, NC, with an Associate’s Degree in Business Administration, and she started working at Aristacare at Alameda Center when it was still Perth Amboy Nursing Home.
Now, I know Junel will shake her head when she hears me say that when I started there, she was a “spoiled little brat.” Well, with much bonding with us (and mostly, much personal growth within herself), she decided what was the right path. Eventually, after being passed-over twice, Junel became Admissions Director for AristaCare at Alameda. She quickly grew into a woman of skill and leadership, taking the initiative to learn to be a better person, and people soon were looking-up to her for her guidance, support, knowledge and leadership skills, including her own family. She set an impressive example for her daughter and her family both local and afar.
The amazing thing about life is that we face challenges as they come-along to us. We sometimes try to anticipate the future, like putting extra money away for a rainy day, or putting money away for our children’s education or for a future vacation. When, I ask you, do we put money away for an illness such as cancer?
In June of 2008, Junel (we refer to each-other as “Sistah,” even-though I’m white, but we have that family bond) called me to say that she was going to have a sonogram of her breast because the doctor felt something there during her annual GYN consultation. Well, guess who went with her! Sonogram and ultrasound was done, and the news was then apparent, we tried to ignore thinking-about it as only a lump, probably a false alarm, probably an enlarged lymph node. But it was indeed positive for breast cancer.
What does one say? What does one do when the person you are so-close-to is diagnosed with this? Well, let me tell you. After the initial shock and going through the normal phases of grieving (denial, anger, bargaining, acceptance), you have to jump into action.
Ladies, the time from when you are diagnosed to when you begin treatment is
imperative. The cancer, given the opportunity, will spread quickly from
the breast because it is so vascular (full of blood vessels and fatty tissue).
Junel Hutchinson is one of the most-amazing women I’ve ever known. During the diagnosis phase, I jumped into-action to get tests and doctors and results in-order to start treatment. I had the easy job. The hardest part of all was for Junel to hear the word “cancer,” especially since we work in the medical field, admitting patients for various levels of treatment from orthopaedic to cardiac to cancer, and we’ve both seen the outcomes of all.
Mind you that the tumor in her breast was very-small, but that didn’t matter. When you hear the word “cancer,” your life flashes in-front of you because we hear all the stories, both good and bad. Yet, when it comes to you, will you initially be able to focus-upon the good?
Junel sought-out her inner self, her inner strength; support of her friends, family and loved ones, and kept an open spirit and mind. Yet, she didn’t air her woes to everyone. Her family was the immediate support, and her co-workers were amazing as-well. In fact we consider all our co-workers at Alameda as our family.
I remember days of taking Junel for her tests, and everyone would come to our office to give her support and even shed a few tears. Junel sought-out her strength, not only from inside her own desire to beat this disease, but she also received it from those who cared-about her.
When Junel was ready, she spoke-up to a female patient of ours who refused to have treatment for her breast cancer. She was afraid of the treatments, of what she heard of hair-loss and illness. Well, let me tell you, as vain as Junel can be, as she is a diva, she right-then-and-there pulled-off her wig and showed the patient that her hair was growing-back, and “even betta than before!”
Breast cancer is just one of the cancers we face. From pure experience, Junel was able to advise a social worker from one of our local hospitals that send us patients for rehab what to do to protect herself from infection during chemo, what to look-out-for during radiation, and what “female” symptoms might occur.
Junel was trying to keep her disease private, knowing the discriminations one faces — for her, even more of a challenge, being a woman, being black, and having cancer — yet, she wrote a testimony on Facebook to educate others; mind you, not only for women of color, but for all women and all men, too.
This was an amazing feat, for she was afraid of the public stigma associated with “breast cancer.”
Junel did have breast surgery, a procedure called a modified mastectomy (that name, in-itself, is scary as all heck). They removed the tumor and surrounding tissue, and some of the lymph nodes, for testing. She also went-through many weeks of chemotherapy to ensure that the cancer didn’t grow-back in
the surrounding tissues. Junel had a port-a-cath inserted because she has
really-bad veins. I tell you this from personal experience, as any time she needed regular bloodwork before the diagnosis, she would call me and say, “Hi, Sistah, watcha doing? Oh, I need you to come and draw my blood because they can’t get it at this clinic after three freaking attempts!” The port-a-cath remains in her right chest, and I flush it once-a-month so that she can have her monthly levels done.
I have to say that I admire her even-more for this because the port is a mo nthly reminder of the 18 months of treatments she went-through. Despite the emotional struggles Junel faces: occasionally discomfort, not to mention the effect it initially had post-operatively on her intimate life, she came-through it like the strong woman that she is. Her fiance Zaraca Jackson also went-through the same grieving process, experiencing sorrow, yet never giving-up hope. We all need that from our loved ones.
Cancer shows no discrimination of race, color, gender or sexual orientation. Even the smallest of lumps that you discover must get checked-out.
Junel Hutchinson is not only my “sistah,” she’s my hero. I admire her for all her strength, experience and spirituality. Now, Sistah, you are the word of support to all. I love you, Sistah!
Our strength lies not only within ourselves, but is supported by those around us. If you know someone with cancer, give them a hug and let them know that they’re loved, that they’re special, that they’re not just a disease, but indeed a human being.
Jenni Carlock, RN, BSN, is Director of Case Management for AristaCare at Alameda, Elm Street, Perth Amboy.
Friday, October 8, 2010
S. AMBOY’S $800,000 WINDFALL?
CY 2010 Budget Adoption Delayed For Last-Minute Fix
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 29, 2010)
SOUTH AMBOY — At a sparsely-attended Special Meeting last week, the City
Council conducted a scheduled public hearing on amendments to the Calendar
Year 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576 but took no
action on the spending plan, voting instead to schedule another Special
Meeting to be held early this week at 6 p.m. at City Hall, N. Broadway.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance
O’Neill were absent from last week’s Special Meeting, called specifically
to hold a public hearing and take a final vote on the CY 2010 Budget.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the
CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the
amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to
$7,852,001. But City Auditor Gary Higgins said that “within the past hour at-most”
before the Special Meeting last week, certain unnamed “developers” had
provided city officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an
additional “$800,000” in new revenues. “If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this calendar-year,” he stated. Higgins indicated that a state Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
official would have to approve the “other revenues” in order for the city
to include them in the CY 2010 Budget. “Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” City Council President Fred Henry stated. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d
allow us to do it.” “It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need
so we can move-forward,” Mayor John O’Leary said. A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers
“only if there’s signed contracts.” In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not
collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s
fiscal problems. The document attached to the meeting-agenda last week appeared to be
identical to the earlier one distributed to the public. The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home
assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the
CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on
the average home. According to the amendments introduced the previous week, 38 of 49
line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be
decreased. A Special Meeting was scheduled for last week despite the fact that Henry
had announced at the Sept. 1 meeting that a public hearing would be held on
amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget at the Council’s Sept. 15
meeting.The calling of a Special Meeting to adopt amendments to the Calendar Year
2010 Budget was specifically rejected when it was suggested at the Sept. 1
meeting by former Councilman Stanley Jankowski, now a Board of Education
member. “You can’t pass it (the Budget) that night,” Jankowski insisted at that
time. “You have to have two readings.”
“They can do it the same night,” attorney Thomas Lanza, sitting-in for his
brother, John Lanza, stated. No legal counsel attended last week’s Special
Meeting. “Why not just have a Special Meeting on the Budget?” Jankowski asked. “You
could be sitting here for hours.” “Hopefully, that’s not going to happen,” Henry said, before moving-on to
another subect and then adjourning the Sept. 1 meeting. Holding a Special Meeting on a Tuesday precluded most of the public from knowing about the hearing and about the coming increase in local taxes
because the reporters for the two out-of-county daily newspapers that cover the
meetings were absent from the previous week’s regular Council meeting, and
the reporters for the two weekly newspapers that cover the meetings do not
publish on Tuesdays. The same holds-true for holding a Special Meeting on a Monday, although one
of the reporters for an out-of-county daily newspaper that covers the
meetings was present for the Special Meeting. In addition to the eight-page Budget Resolution attached to the meeting-agenda, Higgins provided a 20-page Budget Presentation which he
said “complied with” the “Best Practices Checklist” due to be submitted to state
officials by Oct. 1. Some of the numbers included in the Higgins document differed from the
Budget Resolution, including the amount to be raised by local taxes, showing an
increase of $694,138, from $7,157,863 to $7,852,001. Business Administrator Camille Tooker had noted at the last regular meeting that the final CY 2010 Budget had to be approved by the Mayor and Council
no later than Friday, Sept. 24. There was no specific mention of an extension being granted by DCA,
although Higgins said, “We’ll be working on it (the Budget) the next couple of days.” At the Sept. 1 meeting, resident Eileen Ryan disputed city officials’ accounts of why approval of the CY 2010 Budget by DCA has been delayed for several months. Ryan said she spoke with a woman named “Amelia,” who she said told her
that she was overseeing DCA’s review of South Amboy’s spending plan. “According to the information she gave me — and I don’t think she’s wrong — she told me that DCA made several requests to the City of South Amboy about items in the Budget that they needed more information about, and there
was no response whatsoever from the City of South Amboy,” Ryan said. But Tooker denied Ryan’s information, including the identity of the person reviewing the CY 2010 Budget. "The person who’s reviewing our Budget is a male,” Tooker said. However, at the last regular Council meeting, Tooker said the DCA person doing the review is named “Tina.” Henry said at the last regular meeting that the information given by Tooker was correct, implying that Ryan’s statements were incorrect. “I called, and DCA did confirm what Camille said,” he stated. A short time later, Henry said that “some of it (what Ryan had said) was
correct, yes, but the timeline wasn’t.” “I will make that call (to DCA) tomorrow (Sept. 16),” Ryan declared.
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 29, 2010)
SOUTH AMBOY — At a sparsely-attended Special Meeting last week, the City
Council conducted a scheduled public hearing on amendments to the Calendar
Year 2010 Budget which would increase local taxes by $722,576 but took no
action on the spending plan, voting instead to schedule another Special
Meeting to be held early this week at 6 p.m. at City Hall, N. Broadway.
City Law Director John Lanza and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) Terance
O’Neill were absent from last week’s Special Meeting, called specifically
to hold a public hearing and take a final vote on the CY 2010 Budget.
The amendments as introduced earlier would increase the total amount of the
CY 2010 Budget by $1,553,543, from $13,993,033 to $15,546,576, and the
amount to be raised by local taxes by $722,576, from $7,129,425 to
$7,852,001. But City Auditor Gary Higgins said that “within the past hour at-most”
before the Special Meeting last week, certain unnamed “developers” had
provided city officials hope that they might be able to anticipate an
additional “$800,000” in new revenues. “If the $800,000 comes-through, there will be about a $30 increase for this calendar-year,” he stated. Higgins indicated that a state Department of Community Affairs (DCA)
official would have to approve the “other revenues” in order for the city
to include them in the CY 2010 Budget. “Normally, DCA doesn’t let you anticipate funds,” City Council President Fred Henry stated. “Talking with the DCA people today, they said they’d
allow us to do it.” “It appears that the developers are providing us with the documents we need
so we can move-forward,” Mayor John O’Leary said. A source familiar with municipal budgeting indicated to the Amboy Beacon that DCA will allow municipalities to anticipate revenue from developers
“only if there’s signed contracts.” In anticipating revenues, a municipal government runs the risk of not
collecting that revenue — part of the reason for neighboring Perth Amboy’s
fiscal problems. The document attached to the meeting-agenda last week appeared to be
identical to the earlier one distributed to the public. The new tax-increase shown there would be on top of the $39 hike previously-announced by the Administration and the Council on a home
assessed at $266,000, the average in South Amboy. Using the numbers provided with the
CY 2010 Budget as introduced, the amended Budget would result in a $268 tax-hike on
the average home. According to the amendments introduced the previous week, 38 of 49
line-item accounts would be increased, while only 11 line-item accounts would be
decreased. A Special Meeting was scheduled for last week despite the fact that Henry
had announced at the Sept. 1 meeting that a public hearing would be held on
amendments to the Calendar Year 2010 Budget at the Council’s Sept. 15
meeting.The calling of a Special Meeting to adopt amendments to the Calendar Year
2010 Budget was specifically rejected when it was suggested at the Sept. 1
meeting by former Councilman Stanley Jankowski, now a Board of Education
member. “You can’t pass it (the Budget) that night,” Jankowski insisted at that
time. “You have to have two readings.”
“They can do it the same night,” attorney Thomas Lanza, sitting-in for his
brother, John Lanza, stated. No legal counsel attended last week’s Special
Meeting. “Why not just have a Special Meeting on the Budget?” Jankowski asked. “You
could be sitting here for hours.” “Hopefully, that’s not going to happen,” Henry said, before moving-on to
another subect and then adjourning the Sept. 1 meeting. Holding a Special Meeting on a Tuesday precluded most of the public from knowing about the hearing and about the coming increase in local taxes
because the reporters for the two out-of-county daily newspapers that cover the
meetings were absent from the previous week’s regular Council meeting, and
the reporters for the two weekly newspapers that cover the meetings do not
publish on Tuesdays. The same holds-true for holding a Special Meeting on a Monday, although one
of the reporters for an out-of-county daily newspaper that covers the
meetings was present for the Special Meeting. In addition to the eight-page Budget Resolution attached to the meeting-agenda, Higgins provided a 20-page Budget Presentation which he
said “complied with” the “Best Practices Checklist” due to be submitted to state
officials by Oct. 1. Some of the numbers included in the Higgins document differed from the
Budget Resolution, including the amount to be raised by local taxes, showing an
increase of $694,138, from $7,157,863 to $7,852,001. Business Administrator Camille Tooker had noted at the last regular meeting that the final CY 2010 Budget had to be approved by the Mayor and Council
no later than Friday, Sept. 24. There was no specific mention of an extension being granted by DCA,
although Higgins said, “We’ll be working on it (the Budget) the next couple of days.” At the Sept. 1 meeting, resident Eileen Ryan disputed city officials’ accounts of why approval of the CY 2010 Budget by DCA has been delayed for several months. Ryan said she spoke with a woman named “Amelia,” who she said told her
that she was overseeing DCA’s review of South Amboy’s spending plan. “According to the information she gave me — and I don’t think she’s wrong — she told me that DCA made several requests to the City of South Amboy about items in the Budget that they needed more information about, and there
was no response whatsoever from the City of South Amboy,” Ryan said. But Tooker denied Ryan’s information, including the identity of the person reviewing the CY 2010 Budget. "The person who’s reviewing our Budget is a male,” Tooker said. However, at the last regular Council meeting, Tooker said the DCA person doing the review is named “Tina.” Henry said at the last regular meeting that the information given by Tooker was correct, implying that Ryan’s statements were incorrect. “I called, and DCA did confirm what Camille said,” he stated. A short time later, Henry said that “some of it (what Ryan had said) was
correct, yes, but the timeline wasn’t.” “I will make that call (to DCA) tomorrow (Sept. 16),” Ryan declared.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)