(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.”
Friday, October 22, 2010
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.
Federal Trial Continues For Vas, Ramos
By Jim Shea
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 29, 2010)
NEWARK — The case of U.S. vs. Joseph Vas and Melvin Ramos, with U.S.
District Court Judge Susan Wigenton presiding, continued in Room 5C of the
King
Building and U.S. District Courthouse promptly at 12:30 p.m. early last
week.
Participating in the trial were Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and
Jennifer Kramer and defense counsels Jerome Ballarotto, representing Ramos,
and
Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne, representing Vas.
Among those taking the witness-stand last week were former City Council
members Geri Bolanowski and Robert Sottilaro, attorney Robert Hynes, former
Housing Director Julia Keller, former Human Services Director Jeffrey
Gumbs,
Purchasing Agent Gary Muska, Assistant Personnel Director David Benyola,
former Business Administrator Donald Perlee, Federal Agent Jacqueline
Cristiano,
former Public Information Officer Shakira Johnson and Recreation Clerk
Cesar
Jovine.
Excerpts from their testimony follow.
After Kramer showed her the DeKalb Resolution, Bolanowski said, “I voted
for this Resolution.”
“If Ramos was at the meeting, or if anyone made any disclosure of Mayor
Vas’s ownership of the property, had you known about the ownership, would
you
have considered it important?” Kramer asked.
“I would have,” she replied.
“You did ultimately know that Vas had owned this property. What did it feel
like when you learned that Joseph Vas owned the property?”
“I was upset,” Bolanowski said.
“What were you told about the ownership?” Kramer asked Sottilaro.
“All I knew was that it was DeKalb LLC,” he said. “If I had known Vas had
owned the property, I think I would have voted against it.”
Sottilaro told Zegas, “It was only after the fact that I learned that Vas
owned the property.”
“I knew Vas, he was a client of mine, and he asked me to do the closing
regarding DeKalb,” Hynes told Kramer.
Under questioning by Kramer, Hynes went-over the process involved in the
closing on the property.
Keller, who retired in August 2007, was called by Kramer to explain how the
Resolution came-before the Council.
“I questioned, ‘How we can put on a Resolution when we don’t have a
schedule; how can you borrow from other RCAs (Regional Contribution
Agreements)?
“Gumbs said that it had to be paid immediately.,” she said. “I said, ‘We
can’t move without COAH (Council On Affordable Housing) approval;’
technically, we should have to get COAH’s approval.”
“To date, has COAH approved any money for DeKalb?” Kramer asked.
“No,” Keller replied.
“The first time you saw an application for the (DeKalb Avenue) project,
what was you opinion?” Zegas asked.
“It looked like it needed work,” Keller replied.
“At the time of the vote, did you know that Mr. Vas owned DeKalb?”
“No, I thought Harry Jones owned DeKalb.”
“Had you known if Mayor Vas had made a $ 300,000 profit by that sale, would
it have been significant to you?” Kramer asked.
“Yes,” Keller said.
“Where did you learn these things?” Zegas asked.
“In the newspaper,” Keller replied.
On Thursday, Gumbs was called as a witness.
After Kramer questioned Gumbs about his state prosecution, Zegas asked for
a sidebar. The Judge instructed the jury not to “draw any conclusions” regarding Vas
after hearing the charges against Gumbs.
When asked to identify Ramos, Gumbs said, “He was the Mayor’s Aide; he was
attached to the Mayor’s hip.” Bellarotto objected.
Gumbs said that he “had an unusual meeting with Councilman Frank Sinatra
and Harry Jones, as no Councilman in my six years was to meet with me.
Sinatra and Jones were to hold town meetings. Ten minutes later, I got a phone call
from (Mayor’s Confidential Secretary) Debbie Palmer. She said the Mayor
wanted to see me.
“I went upstairs, and the Mayor came out of his office,” Gumbs said. “Vas
said, ‘Take- care of Sinatra. He never asks me for anything.’”
Gumbs said that at Vas’s request, he drafted the Resolution for funding
for DeKalb Avenue, which the Council approved. “On Jan. 11, 2007, did anything unusual take place?” Kramer asked. “There was a purchase-order, but I didn’t recognize the signature on the
purchase order,” Gumbs said. “I wasn’t aware that Dave Benyola was made Business Administrator for a day.” Gumbs testified that he was unaware Vas was involved in the DeKalb project.
“At the time you were asked to make a purchase requisition, were any
disclosures made to you that Joseph Vas had just made a $300,000 profit?”
Kramer asked. “Would it have mattered if you knew the Mayor was the prior owner?”
“It would have mattered,” Gumbs replied.
"What do you believe would have happened if you hadn’t approved the purchase requisition?”
“I would incurred his wrath. I wouldn’t have a job.”
Referring to Jan. 11, 2008, Muska said, “I was in City Hall that day. I received a message from Mr. Perlee that said he would not be in; he was in-and-out.
“At 11:00, Mr. Benyola came in and asked if he could sign a purchase-order.
I said, ‘Unless you had the authorization, you couldn’t sign,’” he
continued. “After lunch, the Mayor walked-by, (and) I heard a slap on the
desk in Mr. Benyola’s office. “Mr. Benyola came-out shaken; Vas walked-out and slammed the desk; there
was virtually no talking for two weeks.”
As Byrne began cross-examination, Zegas started coughing.
“Mr. Sinatra came-up and asked if the purchase-order was signed,” Muska
said “Mr. Sinatra could have asked me on another occasion, but I do
remember that Monday.”
Kramer asked Benyola, Assistant Personnel Director between August 2003 and
August 2007, about contributing to “Vas For Congress.”
“I was sitting in my office on Feb. 2, 2006, and I was asked by Mr. (Vas
political advisor Raymond) Geneske, he took an envelope, cash was given to
me,
I was asked to contribute $2,000 with a check made out to ‘Vas For
Congress,’” Benyola said. “I got the cash for the amount.”
He said that Vas later asked him, “if I received the money.”
“Did you get the cash?”
“Yes.”
“Were you aware of the limit of $2,100?” Kramer asked.
“I made it out for $2,100,” Benyola replied.
“What did you do with the money?”
“I put it in my account.”
On Jan. 11, 2007, Benyola said he “was asked to sign a purchase-order.
“I said I wasn’t authorized to sign a purchase-order. I asked Gary if I
was allowed to sign, he said ‘No.’ I called Ms. (Chief Financial Officer
Jill) Goldy; she said, ‘Absolutely no.’ I contacted Perlee — he lived a
half a
block from City Hall — he said, ‘You shouldn’t sign it; it’s nothing that
couldn’t wait until Monday.’ I told Ms. (Executive Assistant Mildred)
Torres I couldn’t sign.
“Vas showed me a letter appointing me Business Administrator for the day,”
Benyola said. “I signed because I feared for my job. Vas said that ‘Muska
and Goldy don’t know what they are talking-about,’ and he slammed the
desk.”
The next day, Byrne cross-examined Benyola: “You knew that you were
breaking-the-law when you took cash from Mr. Geneske.”
“I knew it was the same rules for state and for federal campaigns,” he
responded.
“You knew that, under the law, when Mr. Vas said to you, ‘Did you get the
money?’, Mr. Vas knew that he, too, was committing a crime.”
“Did you know about the DeKalb project when you signed the
purchase-order?” Kramer asked.
“ I was forced-to” Benyola replied.
“I got a call from Ramos, who wanted me to make a contribution to the
campaign,” Perlee said. “Ramos was acting as Campaign Treasurer; Ramos
said he
would be giving me cash.”
“Did he tell you where the cash came-from?” Kramer asked.
“I gave Ramos the names of two in-laws,” Perlee said. “Ramos came into my
office with cash, $ 6,300 cash, because this was the maximum allowable
amount.”
“If you knew this was wrong, why did you do this?” Kramer asked.
“Up to this point, I was happy,” Perlee said. “I was out ill, and I knew
that the Mayor was unhappy. I gave the money I received to my in-laws.”
Recalling Jan. 11, 2007: “Due to medications, there were times I had to be
out. On Jan. 11, 2007, I was home sick in bed, I received a flurry of phone
calls.
“I learned that Gary had received a purchase-order with insufficient
documentation attached to it that was processed by Jeffrey Gumbs. I said it
would
have to wait until I got back. I told Muska not to prepare the
purchase-order.”
With the jury asked to leave the room, Zegas objected that “this is
hearsay;” the Judge noted the objection but overruled it, and she brought
the jury
back.
“Why did you order Benyola not to sign the purchase-order?” Kramer asked.
“I received a phone call saying the Mayor gave an order to sign the
check,” Perlee said. “I then received a call from Benyola’s wife; she said
that her husband feared losing his job.” “Did you call the Mayor any time that day?” Zegas asked.
“No, because the check had already been signed,” Perlee said.
“You ordered Benyola not to sign the check; is that within your
authority?” Zegas asked.
“I know of no provision in the City of Perth Amboy that would allow the
Mayor to make a temporary appointment,” Perlee declared.
“The fact is, you never called the city attorney to find out whether it was
legal for the Mayor to make this appointment,” Zegas stated.
“Did you discuss with the government that you didn’t tell the FBI about
your relatives’ gift?” Bellarotto asked.
“It was a lie by omission,” Perlee replied. “It was my intention not to
involve my in-laws.”
“You admit that you lied to the FBI, you lied to the grand jury, therefore
you lied under oath,” Ballarotto noted.
Cristiano, a federal agent assigned to Washington, DC, had been assisting
other agents in the Newark Division. On April 23, 2009, she was involved in
the execution of search-warrants at the High Street homes of both Ramos and
Vas. Kramer showed Cristiano items dealing with the Vas Congressional campaign
that she helped to remove from Ramos’s home, including reports of receipts
and disbursements signed by Ramos. There were documents indicating that
Johnson and Jovine were contributors to that campaign. Johnson said she was told by Ramos that “if I’d make-out a check for the campaign, I’ll get the cash back for the check.”
“Did Ramos give you the cash?” Kramer asked. “Yes, I deposited the money into my account,” Johnson replied. As Ballarotto approached the bench, Johnson started to cry loudly.
Ballarotto said, “There’s no reason to cry,” and she immediately stopped
crying. Kramer called Jovin to the witness-stand. “Did you give to the ‘Vas For Congress’ campaign?” Kramer asked. “Mr. Ramos asked me to contribute to the campaign. Ramos said that he’d
reimburse me, that he’d give me cash.” “Did you ask if it was okay?” “Ramos told me that it was okay. Ramos said, ‘Call your wife and have her bring the checkbook.’ I went downstairs and made-out two checks, one for me and one for her, for a total of $4,200 for ‘Vas For Congress,’ and Mr.
Ramos, in turn, gave me the cash.” “You don’t know that one of the checks didn’t clear?” Ballarotto asked.
“You said that you got $4,200, but one of the checks bounced.”
(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Sept. 29, 2010)
NEWARK — The case of U.S. vs. Joseph Vas and Melvin Ramos, with U.S.
District Court Judge Susan Wigenton presiding, continued in Room 5C of the
King
Building and U.S. District Courthouse promptly at 12:30 p.m. early last
week.
Participating in the trial were Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brian Howe and
Jennifer Kramer and defense counsels Jerome Ballarotto, representing Ramos,
and
Alan Zegas and Edward Byrne, representing Vas.
Among those taking the witness-stand last week were former City Council
members Geri Bolanowski and Robert Sottilaro, attorney Robert Hynes, former
Housing Director Julia Keller, former Human Services Director Jeffrey
Gumbs,
Purchasing Agent Gary Muska, Assistant Personnel Director David Benyola,
former Business Administrator Donald Perlee, Federal Agent Jacqueline
Cristiano,
former Public Information Officer Shakira Johnson and Recreation Clerk
Cesar
Jovine.
Excerpts from their testimony follow.
After Kramer showed her the DeKalb Resolution, Bolanowski said, “I voted
for this Resolution.”
“If Ramos was at the meeting, or if anyone made any disclosure of Mayor
Vas’s ownership of the property, had you known about the ownership, would
you
have considered it important?” Kramer asked.
“I would have,” she replied.
“You did ultimately know that Vas had owned this property. What did it feel
like when you learned that Joseph Vas owned the property?”
“I was upset,” Bolanowski said.
“What were you told about the ownership?” Kramer asked Sottilaro.
“All I knew was that it was DeKalb LLC,” he said. “If I had known Vas had
owned the property, I think I would have voted against it.”
Sottilaro told Zegas, “It was only after the fact that I learned that Vas
owned the property.”
“I knew Vas, he was a client of mine, and he asked me to do the closing
regarding DeKalb,” Hynes told Kramer.
Under questioning by Kramer, Hynes went-over the process involved in the
closing on the property.
Keller, who retired in August 2007, was called by Kramer to explain how the
Resolution came-before the Council.
“I questioned, ‘How we can put on a Resolution when we don’t have a
schedule; how can you borrow from other RCAs (Regional Contribution
Agreements)?
“Gumbs said that it had to be paid immediately.,” she said. “I said, ‘We
can’t move without COAH (Council On Affordable Housing) approval;’
technically, we should have to get COAH’s approval.”
“To date, has COAH approved any money for DeKalb?” Kramer asked.
“No,” Keller replied.
“The first time you saw an application for the (DeKalb Avenue) project,
what was you opinion?” Zegas asked.
“It looked like it needed work,” Keller replied.
“At the time of the vote, did you know that Mr. Vas owned DeKalb?”
“No, I thought Harry Jones owned DeKalb.”
“Had you known if Mayor Vas had made a $ 300,000 profit by that sale, would
it have been significant to you?” Kramer asked.
“Yes,” Keller said.
“Where did you learn these things?” Zegas asked.
“In the newspaper,” Keller replied.
On Thursday, Gumbs was called as a witness.
After Kramer questioned Gumbs about his state prosecution, Zegas asked for
a sidebar. The Judge instructed the jury not to “draw any conclusions” regarding Vas
after hearing the charges against Gumbs.
When asked to identify Ramos, Gumbs said, “He was the Mayor’s Aide; he was
attached to the Mayor’s hip.” Bellarotto objected.
Gumbs said that he “had an unusual meeting with Councilman Frank Sinatra
and Harry Jones, as no Councilman in my six years was to meet with me.
Sinatra and Jones were to hold town meetings. Ten minutes later, I got a phone call
from (Mayor’s Confidential Secretary) Debbie Palmer. She said the Mayor
wanted to see me.
“I went upstairs, and the Mayor came out of his office,” Gumbs said. “Vas
said, ‘Take- care of Sinatra. He never asks me for anything.’”
Gumbs said that at Vas’s request, he drafted the Resolution for funding
for DeKalb Avenue, which the Council approved. “On Jan. 11, 2007, did anything unusual take place?” Kramer asked. “There was a purchase-order, but I didn’t recognize the signature on the
purchase order,” Gumbs said. “I wasn’t aware that Dave Benyola was made Business Administrator for a day.” Gumbs testified that he was unaware Vas was involved in the DeKalb project.
“At the time you were asked to make a purchase requisition, were any
disclosures made to you that Joseph Vas had just made a $300,000 profit?”
Kramer asked. “Would it have mattered if you knew the Mayor was the prior owner?”
“It would have mattered,” Gumbs replied.
"What do you believe would have happened if you hadn’t approved the purchase requisition?”
“I would incurred his wrath. I wouldn’t have a job.”
Referring to Jan. 11, 2008, Muska said, “I was in City Hall that day. I received a message from Mr. Perlee that said he would not be in; he was in-and-out.
“At 11:00, Mr. Benyola came in and asked if he could sign a purchase-order.
I said, ‘Unless you had the authorization, you couldn’t sign,’” he
continued. “After lunch, the Mayor walked-by, (and) I heard a slap on the
desk in Mr. Benyola’s office. “Mr. Benyola came-out shaken; Vas walked-out and slammed the desk; there
was virtually no talking for two weeks.”
As Byrne began cross-examination, Zegas started coughing.
“Mr. Sinatra came-up and asked if the purchase-order was signed,” Muska
said “Mr. Sinatra could have asked me on another occasion, but I do
remember that Monday.”
Kramer asked Benyola, Assistant Personnel Director between August 2003 and
August 2007, about contributing to “Vas For Congress.”
“I was sitting in my office on Feb. 2, 2006, and I was asked by Mr. (Vas
political advisor Raymond) Geneske, he took an envelope, cash was given to
me,
I was asked to contribute $2,000 with a check made out to ‘Vas For
Congress,’” Benyola said. “I got the cash for the amount.”
He said that Vas later asked him, “if I received the money.”
“Did you get the cash?”
“Yes.”
“Were you aware of the limit of $2,100?” Kramer asked.
“I made it out for $2,100,” Benyola replied.
“What did you do with the money?”
“I put it in my account.”
On Jan. 11, 2007, Benyola said he “was asked to sign a purchase-order.
“I said I wasn’t authorized to sign a purchase-order. I asked Gary if I
was allowed to sign, he said ‘No.’ I called Ms. (Chief Financial Officer
Jill) Goldy; she said, ‘Absolutely no.’ I contacted Perlee — he lived a
half a
block from City Hall — he said, ‘You shouldn’t sign it; it’s nothing that
couldn’t wait until Monday.’ I told Ms. (Executive Assistant Mildred)
Torres I couldn’t sign.
“Vas showed me a letter appointing me Business Administrator for the day,”
Benyola said. “I signed because I feared for my job. Vas said that ‘Muska
and Goldy don’t know what they are talking-about,’ and he slammed the
desk.”
The next day, Byrne cross-examined Benyola: “You knew that you were
breaking-the-law when you took cash from Mr. Geneske.”
“I knew it was the same rules for state and for federal campaigns,” he
responded.
“You knew that, under the law, when Mr. Vas said to you, ‘Did you get the
money?’, Mr. Vas knew that he, too, was committing a crime.”
“Did you know about the DeKalb project when you signed the
purchase-order?” Kramer asked.
“ I was forced-to” Benyola replied.
“I got a call from Ramos, who wanted me to make a contribution to the
campaign,” Perlee said. “Ramos was acting as Campaign Treasurer; Ramos
said he
would be giving me cash.”
“Did he tell you where the cash came-from?” Kramer asked.
“I gave Ramos the names of two in-laws,” Perlee said. “Ramos came into my
office with cash, $ 6,300 cash, because this was the maximum allowable
amount.”
“If you knew this was wrong, why did you do this?” Kramer asked.
“Up to this point, I was happy,” Perlee said. “I was out ill, and I knew
that the Mayor was unhappy. I gave the money I received to my in-laws.”
Recalling Jan. 11, 2007: “Due to medications, there were times I had to be
out. On Jan. 11, 2007, I was home sick in bed, I received a flurry of phone
calls.
“I learned that Gary had received a purchase-order with insufficient
documentation attached to it that was processed by Jeffrey Gumbs. I said it
would
have to wait until I got back. I told Muska not to prepare the
purchase-order.”
With the jury asked to leave the room, Zegas objected that “this is
hearsay;” the Judge noted the objection but overruled it, and she brought
the jury
back.
“Why did you order Benyola not to sign the purchase-order?” Kramer asked.
“I received a phone call saying the Mayor gave an order to sign the
check,” Perlee said. “I then received a call from Benyola’s wife; she said
that her husband feared losing his job.” “Did you call the Mayor any time that day?” Zegas asked.
“No, because the check had already been signed,” Perlee said.
“You ordered Benyola not to sign the check; is that within your
authority?” Zegas asked.
“I know of no provision in the City of Perth Amboy that would allow the
Mayor to make a temporary appointment,” Perlee declared.
“The fact is, you never called the city attorney to find out whether it was
legal for the Mayor to make this appointment,” Zegas stated.
“Did you discuss with the government that you didn’t tell the FBI about
your relatives’ gift?” Bellarotto asked.
“It was a lie by omission,” Perlee replied. “It was my intention not to
involve my in-laws.”
“You admit that you lied to the FBI, you lied to the grand jury, therefore
you lied under oath,” Ballarotto noted.
Cristiano, a federal agent assigned to Washington, DC, had been assisting
other agents in the Newark Division. On April 23, 2009, she was involved in
the execution of search-warrants at the High Street homes of both Ramos and
Vas. Kramer showed Cristiano items dealing with the Vas Congressional campaign
that she helped to remove from Ramos’s home, including reports of receipts
and disbursements signed by Ramos. There were documents indicating that
Johnson and Jovine were contributors to that campaign. Johnson said she was told by Ramos that “if I’d make-out a check for the campaign, I’ll get the cash back for the check.”
“Did Ramos give you the cash?” Kramer asked. “Yes, I deposited the money into my account,” Johnson replied. As Ballarotto approached the bench, Johnson started to cry loudly.
Ballarotto said, “There’s no reason to cry,” and she immediately stopped
crying. Kramer called Jovin to the witness-stand. “Did you give to the ‘Vas For Congress’ campaign?” Kramer asked. “Mr. Ramos asked me to contribute to the campaign. Ramos said that he’d
reimburse me, that he’d give me cash.” “Did you ask if it was okay?” “Ramos told me that it was okay. Ramos said, ‘Call your wife and have her bring the checkbook.’ I went downstairs and made-out two checks, one for me and one for her, for a total of $4,200 for ‘Vas For Congress,’ and Mr.
Ramos, in turn, gave me the cash.” “You don’t know that one of the checks didn’t clear?” Ballarotto asked.
“You said that you got $4,200, but one of the checks bounced.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)