Senior Center, under construction.
Hey, Plainfielders! The next time Jerry Green tells you something 'won't cost the taxpayers a dime', grab your wallet or purse and run, RUN, RUN in the opposite direction as fast as your little feet will take you.
If you don't, you're likely to find yourself subject of a bait-and-switch ploy.
A resolution (R-138-10) quietly slipped into last night's Council agenda provoked questions by the public that led to a Council discussion that ended with the resolution tabled pending answers to a number of questions.
Dr. Harold Yood (known affectionately to all as the blogger 'Olddoc') was the first to speak when the public comments section was opened up, and he zeroed in on the resolution, which was to authorize the mayor to execute an agreement with Dornoch Plainfield, LLC, for the PURCHASE of 400 East Front Street, Unit 101 for use as a Senior Citizen Center and Unit 102 for use as a Veterans Center.
Jim Pivnichny, Republican candidate for mayor last year, seconded Dr. Yood's questions.
Yood, Pivnichny and I all recalled that the Senior Center was supposed to be 'free' (Assemblyman Green's word) -- well, alright, it was to cost $1. That is the same amount for which the property was conveyed by the City to the UCIA and thence to the developer.
Corporation Counsel Dan Williamson agreed, but noted that that was for a 'plain vanilla box' and that the dollar amount involved here -- $257,000 -- was for work done to outfit the space for its actual uses.
This provoked a long discussion between Council members Mapp, McWilliams and Storch and the Administration over the expenditures, how they were decided upon, why they were so high, and whether or not there were other shoes to drop in this matter.
When Councilor McWilliams protested that the matter was being presented 'undiscussed' and that there was no money to pay for this, I thought I heard Mr. Williamson say it could be taken out of the bond ordinance for $4.4M which had been adopted just moments before.
Councilor Mapp stated in no uncertain terms that that was not permissible.
Councilor Storch moved to table the resolution. Having a second, Council President tried to bring the matter to a vote when Councilor Reid objected that he had a question. McWilliams explained that a motion to table is privileged, stops all discussion, and must be voted up or down before the meeting can move forward.
The Council voted 5-1 to table the motion (Reid voted no, Councilor Burney was absent).
I have two really big questions about this whole mess --
First, how could the Administration authorize work to be done to the tune of $257,000 without first coming to the Council for authorization to spend the monies?
Who authorized the work to be done? By whom was the work done? Were the state's public bidding laws violated in having the work done? Why was nothing ever presented to the Council before this? And why wasn't the matter on last week's agenda-setting session?
This reminds me of the extra-legal goings-on under Mayor Robinson-Briggs' first city administrator, who spent over $100,000 without Council approval. He left under a cloud.
Second, I question the reference to a PURCHASE of the Senior Center and Veterans Center units.
In the Developer's Agreement (see link at end of post), Section 9 (b) says that 'upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Senior Citizens Center, ANY HOLDER OF A MORTGAGE OR OTHER ENCUMBRANCE OR LIEN UPON THE PROPERTY in accordance with this Agreement shall execute a WRITTEN RELEASE OF THE SENIOR CENTER in recordable form' (page 9, emphasis mine). This would seem to indicate the Senior Center is the City's, period. Alright, maybe we'll have to cough up a dollar.
As for the Veterans Center, the Developer's Agreement addresses this issue in two places: Section 7. (a) (iii) says the veterans area shall be used as a sales model until all units are sold (page 4), and Section 8. (b), which provides that upon sale of ALL the condo units, the developer shall convey 'a fee simple interest' in the Veterans Center to the City for $1 (page 8).
If anything, the Administration has either got it wrong or is being disingenuous.
Since the Developer's Agreement is between the UCIA and the developer, what standing does the City have to modify any of the terms of the Agreement?
The Council is perfectly right to demand answers to the questions that have been raised before they do anything along the lines proposed by the Robinson-Briggs Administration.
NOTE ABOUT VIEWING THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT:
The upside-down issue came from the way Staples did the scan.
Here's the fix --
Click on the document window and make sure it is loaded.
Right-click on the document and select 'Rotate clockwise'; this will make a quarter-turn of the document. Do it again and the document will be right-side up and easy to read.
If you're left-handed, you can rotate counterclockwise, as long as you do it twice.
Note however, that if you revisit the document in the future you will have to rotate it again.
- Plainfield Today: "Monarch Condo documents: Developer's Agreement"
-- Dan Damon [follow]
Posts
9 comments:
Once again, I ask the question, "How long will we suffer this inept and dishonest mayor and her mentor." We can remove her and then wait until the next election and remove him. Where do I sign to start the impeachment process.
And didn't the seniors reject another space in Plainfield that wasn't quite up to their standards? and now, we're finding out that the taxpayers are on the hook for the cost of the New Senior Center that Sharon had bragged about for so long...perhaps the seniors should be charged admission to this costly recreation center(on a use basis). Next time, they won't be so quick to vote for Sharon.
Way to go Mayor of the Year- $257K spent under your watch without without prior appoval. Is this what they refer to as a "Confirming Order"?
Can-Only-Need-Funding-If-Real-Management-Is-No-Good
Actually Anonymous at 10:13, what's disgusting is what the Assistant Mayor and Jerry have done to the citizens of Plainfield..ignoring it, pretending it didn't and doesn't happen is equally disgusting...Sharon USED, note the CAPITAL LETTERS...USED those Seniors as puppets, pawns and lackeys to get what she wanted...and now they and the rest of the citizens of Plainfield are being asked to eat it. The time for polite "kissy kissy" language with the half-wit mayor and his assistant mayor the Cheshire Cat has come and gone.
Again I repeat -- What's disgusting is that people like you find my take, approach and language regarding the subject more disgusting than another "fast one" by Jerry and Sharon on the taxpayers is equally disgusting. You must be either riding the gravy train or have someone close to you slopping away at the trough.
Good Day Sir..GOOD DAY !
Rob, that was a little over the top and I took it down. But your general thrust is on target.
The whole thing has been flim-flammery, including the fact that the seniors don't have the space they had at 305, and they have to share with the community policing unit -- which they didn't need to do before.
I said it before and I will say it again. This is why the seniors should have been left at the old location. Nothing in life is free! Read the fine print! And then disclose it to the public before it happens. This could have been avoided if they stayed at the old, BIGGER with PARKING location. It could have been renovated and been made into a shining star for the seniors, who were definately played as fools. They could have even bought the space as a condo from the property owner, but noooooo, not in Plainfield.
Thanks Dan!
~10:13am
I recently had occasion to visit the senior center and I was appalled. The center is nothing more than a large room filled with tables and chairs, and music playing over old-time speakers. Seniors show up at 9am, find a seat at a table with their group of buddies, and sit there virtually all day - gossiping and cliquing like high schoolers. And it's no wonder. There are no activities for these seniors, no classes to speak of, nothing to stimulate them at all. What a shame. The center should have a director and staff with the expertise to run programs that enrich these seniors' lives. Unfortunately, Plainfield's seniors don't know what they're missing so they don't demand more from the mayor.
Post a Comment