Back in November of 2017, we spent a couple of days examining former Mayor Eric Jackson's failed Trenton Resident Employment initiative. We outlined how there was nothing to show for the program or the money paid to Charles Hill, the consultant hired to shape and oversee the initiative. Should anyone be surprised to learn that all these months later, Mr. Hill still hasn't been made to answer for his blatant ripoff of the city?
To recap: in September of 2014, early in the Jackson administration, the council passed an ordinance creating the Trenton Employment Commission. The purpose of the commission was to meet monthly to oversee the Mayor's Trenton Resident Employment Initiative.
Thirteen months later, in October of 2015, the council passed a resolution authorizing a one year/$50,000.00 contract with Hill Consultants LLC and its principal, Charles Hill coordinate and implement the initiative.
We pointed out at that time very little work had been done; no one had been appointed to the commission; no meetings of the commission had been held; and Mr. Hill seemingly walked away after billing the city and being paid about $23,000.00 for his alleged work on the project.
It was also noted at the time that Mr. Hill appeared to have arbitrarily and unilaterally raised his hourly billing rate from $100 to $125 on the six invoices. He was paid the extra money and no one ever blinked an eye or raised a question.
Even after we published our findings and shared the same with the DCA and its Trenton "monitor", no one from the state, the administration or the city council bothered to inquire into what happened to the initiative or what did the city really receive for the money spent.
Well, as it turns out, the city did make at least a half-hearted attempt at clearing some of this up. On June 18, 2018, in the waning days of Mayor Jackson's term, the City of Trenton filed a complaint against Mr. Hill and Hill Consultants, LLC to recoup $4,750.00 in over payments to Mr. Hill, plus interest, court costs, attorney fees "and any further sums that the court may deem equitable and just."
Good, right?
Well, it would be except that the defendant was never served. It appears as though they tried to serve him at his business address in Trenton; a rented office long since vacated. We're guessing they didn't try to serve him at his last known residence address in Newtown, Pennsylvania. The address is right there in Hill's response to the city's original RFP. Surely they could refile the complaint to be served there.
Recovering $4,750.00 + in owed money will not come close to solving the city's fiscal woes, but it just might stop one more con from walking away with pockets lined with taxpayers funds.
Showing posts with label Eric Jackson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eric Jackson. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 06, 2019
Wednesday, June 06, 2018
For what it's worth
Entry edited to clarify actual title holder of the property in question
"I must stress that this is very much a personal, not a political decision," Jackson said at the podium outside his City Hall office.
"I still believe I have much to contribute to Trenton's rebirth, but I believe my contributions will be greater outside the halls of City Hall and the mayor's office," he said. "I am grateful, eternally grateful to every resident for entrusting me with the responsibility of being mayor."
So said outgoing Trenton Mayor, Eric Jackson in Kevin Shea's Times article on January 26 of this year.
Well, we guess Jackson forgot to add "from outside of Trenton" to his statement.
Looks as though Jackson, like his one time employer and mentor, Doug Palmer, is ready to pack up and leave town once out of office. The soon-to-be former Mayor's Melrose Avenue home in the city's Villa Park neighborhood is on the market for $205,000.
Public records indicate that the house was purchased in 2007 by Denise Johnson, presumably, the now Mrs. Jackson, for $235,000.
Public records indicate that the house was purchased in 2007 by Denise Johnson, presumably, the now Mrs. Jackson, for $235,000.
Good luck getting that price.
And goodbye, Mr. Mayor.
And goodbye, Mr. Mayor.
Thursday, February 08, 2018
Pessimistically Optimistic
Yesterday, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection announced they had issued an Administrative Consent Order regarding the Trenton Water Works. The ACO outlines definitive steps and deadlines for improvements, operations, and staffing of the water utility. Failure to meet the deadlines will leave the city open to fines.
The troubles at TWW have been well documented by Kevin Moriarty and the local press. In the past week the governing bodies of both Trenton and Hamilton have had special presentations/discussions about the ongoing issues. Yet there still seems to be a lot of misinformation out there. (Some of which is due to the city of Trenton's inability and/or unwillingness to communicate clearly with the TWW customer base as well as public officials in the towns served by the utility).
We heard more than one public official say that would like transparency with regards to the budget of the Trenton Water Works. Well, the water budget is available on line as part of the City of Trenton budget. Unfortunately, some of the numbers are not readable because, for space reasons the cells are not large enough to contain the entire sum. However, the key information is there, especially the amount of the anticipated and realized surpluses each year.
With a realized surplus of $12 million for fiscal year 2017, it is obvious that there is money available for staffing, maintenance and improvements.
There is confusion about the city's residency requirement for employees. Let's be real clear right and here and now, the residency ordinance was amended in October of 2014 to allow a "waiver for exceptional persons".
If the residency waiver was in effect, why have so many technical positions been left unfilled?
One answer, based upon the testimony heard at last week's Trenton city council meeting, was that the city was bad about responding to/following up with applicants. One individual stated she never heard back from the city; not even a "thank you, no" letter. Nothing!
The administration offered the excuse that the salaries being offered "were not competitive". Well, if you are operating the utility with a surplus but your salaries are not competitive, maybe you should increase those salaries. Is it that hard?
A third issue is that, until recently, the advertising of the vacancies seemed to be sparse and sporadic at best. We heard that open positions were not currently posted on the city website and a suggestion to hang a "Now Hiring" banner on the filtration plant ignored. You aren't going to get many applicants if they don't know there are openings.
Taken altogether, it appears less that the city was unable to hire people and more like it didn't put any real effort into hiring people.
The ACO has set benchmarks for hiring critical personnel and recent contracts issued to Wade Trim for contract employees to fill some of the vacancies are a start. With increased staffing of professionals, we would expect to see a return to normal, proper operations.
Timely notification of customers about events potentially affecting have been another complaint heard over and over. The DEP has recognized that TWW's Emergency Action Plan is deficient and is demanding it be updated to eliminate those deficiencies. In a February 7 article in the Trentonian, Hamilton mayor, Kelly Yaede, complained that TWW still has up to 24 hours to notify customers.
While many are still dubious about the ability of Trenton to professionally manage the utility, the ACO lays out a pretty straightforward road map of what needs to be done and by one. To help keep things on course, TWW must file monthly progress reports with DEP until all items have been completed. The reports are due to be submitted on the last day of each month, unless said date falls on a weekend. In that case, the reports are due on the first business day of the new month. There are fines for each day the reports are late. A prior ACO required "quarterly progress reports" be we are not sure if any were filed.
To help restore confidence in TWW, we believe it would be best if the city made those reports public at the time of submission to DEP. In this way, the customers and all of the public officials can track progress along with the DEP. If things get off track, public pressure can be brought to bear and the situation corrected sooner rather than later.
We feel this new ACO is both a positive first step and a last chance warning for TWW, Trenton's governing body and mayor now and going forward.
We're pessimistically optimistic
The troubles at TWW have been well documented by Kevin Moriarty and the local press. In the past week the governing bodies of both Trenton and Hamilton have had special presentations/discussions about the ongoing issues. Yet there still seems to be a lot of misinformation out there. (Some of which is due to the city of Trenton's inability and/or unwillingness to communicate clearly with the TWW customer base as well as public officials in the towns served by the utility).
We heard more than one public official say that would like transparency with regards to the budget of the Trenton Water Works. Well, the water budget is available on line as part of the City of Trenton budget. Unfortunately, some of the numbers are not readable because, for space reasons the cells are not large enough to contain the entire sum. However, the key information is there, especially the amount of the anticipated and realized surpluses each year.
With a realized surplus of $12 million for fiscal year 2017, it is obvious that there is money available for staffing, maintenance and improvements.
There is confusion about the city's residency requirement for employees. Let's be real clear right and here and now, the residency ordinance was amended in October of 2014 to allow a "waiver for exceptional persons".
Chapter 2. AdministrationArticle XVI. Officers and Employees ...It is obvious that the intent of the amendment was to allow the city to hire form outside of the city the licensed individuals necessary for the proper operation of the TWW. And, it was done in the first few months of the failed Jackson administration.
§ 2-95. Residence requirements; exception; waiver. D. Waiver for exceptional persons. Whenever the hiring authority of the City of Trenton shall determine that there are certain specific positions and employments requiring special talents or skills which are necessary for the operations of the City of Trenton and which are not likely to be found among the residents of the City, such positions or employments so determined shall be filled without reference to residency. This provision shall be used for positions or employments for (1) officers that are subject to the advice and consent of the City Council and (2) positions requiring persons with scientific or technical licenses or certifications required by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey Division of Community Affairs or any other state governing agency.
[Amended 10-2-2014 by Ord. No. 14-33]
If the residency waiver was in effect, why have so many technical positions been left unfilled?
One answer, based upon the testimony heard at last week's Trenton city council meeting, was that the city was bad about responding to/following up with applicants. One individual stated she never heard back from the city; not even a "thank you, no" letter. Nothing!
The administration offered the excuse that the salaries being offered "were not competitive". Well, if you are operating the utility with a surplus but your salaries are not competitive, maybe you should increase those salaries. Is it that hard?
A third issue is that, until recently, the advertising of the vacancies seemed to be sparse and sporadic at best. We heard that open positions were not currently posted on the city website and a suggestion to hang a "Now Hiring" banner on the filtration plant ignored. You aren't going to get many applicants if they don't know there are openings.
Taken altogether, it appears less that the city was unable to hire people and more like it didn't put any real effort into hiring people.
The ACO has set benchmarks for hiring critical personnel and recent contracts issued to Wade Trim for contract employees to fill some of the vacancies are a start. With increased staffing of professionals, we would expect to see a return to normal, proper operations.
Timely notification of customers about events potentially affecting have been another complaint heard over and over. The DEP has recognized that TWW's Emergency Action Plan is deficient and is demanding it be updated to eliminate those deficiencies. In a February 7 article in the Trentonian, Hamilton mayor, Kelly Yaede, complained that TWW still has up to 24 hours to notify customers.
“The neighboring municipalities should receive the notification within 60 minutes,” the Hamilton mayor said. “When you’re dealing a public health crisis, particularly dealing with quality drinking water, notification is key. In this day and age of social media, getting information out quickly, timliness is imperative.”As we pointed out in a previous entry, that is the maximum time that Federal regulations for a Tier 1 (Immediate Notice) event to be communicated to the customers. We have to assume that the new policies and procedures to be adopted by TWW aren't going to tell employees to wait the full day before notification. We'd expect something along the lines of "should be notified as soon as possible but not more than 24 hours after an event occurred."
While many are still dubious about the ability of Trenton to professionally manage the utility, the ACO lays out a pretty straightforward road map of what needs to be done and by one. To help keep things on course, TWW must file monthly progress reports with DEP until all items have been completed. The reports are due to be submitted on the last day of each month, unless said date falls on a weekend. In that case, the reports are due on the first business day of the new month. There are fines for each day the reports are late. A prior ACO required "quarterly progress reports" be we are not sure if any were filed.
To help restore confidence in TWW, we believe it would be best if the city made those reports public at the time of submission to DEP. In this way, the customers and all of the public officials can track progress along with the DEP. If things get off track, public pressure can be brought to bear and the situation corrected sooner rather than later.
We feel this new ACO is both a positive first step and a last chance warning for TWW, Trenton's governing body and mayor now and going forward.
We're pessimistically optimistic
Saturday, January 27, 2018
Deja Vu All Over Again
Trenton mayor Eric Jackson made it official yesterday. He will not run for a second term.
We weren't even going to post about this somewhat anticlimactic announcement from the failed first term mayor. His tenure in office has been marked by failures and missteps on a regular basis. After being literally missing in action for at least a month and not having filed his paperwork to run in May's municipal election three weeks into January the announcement came as no surprise to Trenton city hall watchers.
If you are really interested, you read Jackson's statement as posted on the city website here.
The key parts of Jackson's statement are that he's done what he set out to do in office and that he making this decision was personal, not political.
Even in announcing his decision to not run again, Jackson echoed what Doug had said just over 8 years ago. On December 9, 2009, we posted this in response to Doug's announcement that he wouldn't run again:
Their decision to not run again made a lot of people happy.
We weren't even going to post about this somewhat anticlimactic announcement from the failed first term mayor. His tenure in office has been marked by failures and missteps on a regular basis. After being literally missing in action for at least a month and not having filed his paperwork to run in May's municipal election three weeks into January the announcement came as no surprise to Trenton city hall watchers.
If you are really interested, you read Jackson's statement as posted on the city website here.
The key parts of Jackson's statement are that he's done what he set out to do in office and that he making this decision was personal, not political.
And so today, after four years of hard work, four years of renewed energy and vibrancy, four years of reform, four years of growth and four years of positive transformation, I am here to announce that my work as mayor is complete and that I will not seek a second term as mayor.
As with my decision to run for mayor, I made this decision after great consideration. And I must stress that this is very much a personal, not political, decision. I still believe I have much to contribute to Trenton’s rebirth, but I now believe that my contributions will be greater outside of City Hall than from the Mayor’s Office. I am grateful to every resident for entrusting me with the responsibility of leading our city and very proud of all we’ve accomplished together. Now that the City has been restored to fiscal stability and put on a path to economic prosperity and greater public safety for all residents, I will look forward to continuing that work.Jackson was often labeled "Palmer 2.0" or "Palmer Lite" by detractors. A reference to the 20 year mayor under whom Jackson served as Director of Public Works. The image of a clone administration was enhanced somewhat by Jackson's choice to fill his cabinet with other former-Palmer administration stalwarts.
Even in announcing his decision to not run again, Jackson echoed what Doug had said just over 8 years ago. On December 9, 2009, we posted this in response to Doug's announcement that he wouldn't run again:
Citing a decision made in concert with family and a desire to leave on his own terms (not get voted out), Palmer stated he was comfortable with the accomplishments of his 19+ years in office.
Palmer vowed to continue working hard during the last seven months of his term and hand his successor a Trenton in better shape than what it was in 1990. He clicked off some of his notable achievements: lowered crime rate, increased housing/home ownership opportunities, economic development.There is one other similarity between the two.
Their decision to not run again made a lot of people happy.
Monday, January 15, 2018
Another strike against Jackson
It's not funny anymore.
The situation with Trenton Water Works is bad, but the issue of poor communication from the administration of Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson is way out of control.
The latter compounds the former.
Today, Trenton's water utility experienced another issue with poor quality resulting in a boil water advisory for customers in Trenton and parts of Ewing and Hamilton.
It was the NJ DEP who called for the boil water advisory and who, ultimately, got the word out. Trenton's communication mechanism was apparently paralyzed by the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.
As word spread, first on social media, then via newspaper articles posted online, then a notice sent out by the Hamilton Township municipal government, there was nothing from the City of Trenton.
No robocalls, although several had been sent out reminding residents of no trash pick up today.
No posting on the city website until way after the fact.
This begs the question, yet again, #WheresEric?
The problems with the utility have been well documented elsewhere. It is unfathomable that a man who spent a good chunk of his career with responsibility, first as Public Works Director and later as Mayor, of the TWW couldn't get a handle on the issues even a little bit.
There have been problems with staffing for years and Trenton's residency requirement for employees was often cited as a problem. In 2014, Trenton's city council passed amendments to the ordinance that allowed the city hire from outside the city boundaries if need be. Still, TWW has been cited as being woefully understaffed.
Trenton was ordered to make cover and make other improvements to its reservoir. The money is there, yet the work has not been done.
The state Department of Environmental Protection, citing the city's continued failure to properly staff and manage the utility, told them to move ahead with contracting for an outside operator to take over.
That hasn't been done.
With each repeated failure of the water treatment plant, customers wait for information and advisories from the city. And wait. And wait.
The mayor is an "experienced" government officer who sold himself to voters as someone who could "hit the ground running" and successfully handle the running of Trenton. He's brought back lots of equally "experienced" city hall veterans as division and department directors. And he has well paid public information officer. Yet Jackson and company are incredibly tight-lipped when there's a problem with the drinking water supply (or missing employment tax funds or any other negative issue). If team Jackson communicates anything at all, it is late and lacking pertinent details.
Just look at today's notices posted on three municipal websites about the water issues:
Here's Ewing's notice to residents:
Hamilton posted this one:
Finally, just a mere 12 hours after first becoming aware of the problem, the city of Trenton utilized its robocall system to contact TWW customers.
It certainly shows that the first term mayor and his hand chosen team are not up to the task of running a water utility or a city; and certainly not both.
How can the mayor say he's working on economic development when he can't communicate? How can he claim to be making Trenton a better place to work and live when he can't safeguard the water supply? How can anyone feel good about investing in, moving a business to or residing in a city run by a bunch of mute misfits?
It remains to be seen if Jackson is going to run for a second term. As of a week ago, he had not filed his campaign paperwork. And we know he hasn't kept up with his finance reports from the 2014 campaign.
If he does run, there isn't a single voter in Trenton who should give up his or her vote to this failed mayor.
If he doesn't run let us hope he isn't given an appointment in the administration of incoming governor Phil Murphy. We can't think of any one less qualified for a continued government paycheck.
And, if Jackson doesn't run, voters would be well advised to not vote for any candidate or slate that gets a Jackson endorsement.
Eric E. Jackson has failed Trenton and it is time for the voters to fail him.
The situation with Trenton Water Works is bad, but the issue of poor communication from the administration of Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson is way out of control.
The latter compounds the former.
Today, Trenton's water utility experienced another issue with poor quality resulting in a boil water advisory for customers in Trenton and parts of Ewing and Hamilton.
It was the NJ DEP who called for the boil water advisory and who, ultimately, got the word out. Trenton's communication mechanism was apparently paralyzed by the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday.
As word spread, first on social media, then via newspaper articles posted online, then a notice sent out by the Hamilton Township municipal government, there was nothing from the City of Trenton.
No robocalls, although several had been sent out reminding residents of no trash pick up today.
No posting on the city website until way after the fact.
This begs the question, yet again, #WheresEric?
The problems with the utility have been well documented elsewhere. It is unfathomable that a man who spent a good chunk of his career with responsibility, first as Public Works Director and later as Mayor, of the TWW couldn't get a handle on the issues even a little bit.
There have been problems with staffing for years and Trenton's residency requirement for employees was often cited as a problem. In 2014, Trenton's city council passed amendments to the ordinance that allowed the city hire from outside the city boundaries if need be. Still, TWW has been cited as being woefully understaffed.
Trenton was ordered to make cover and make other improvements to its reservoir. The money is there, yet the work has not been done.
The state Department of Environmental Protection, citing the city's continued failure to properly staff and manage the utility, told them to move ahead with contracting for an outside operator to take over.
That hasn't been done.
With each repeated failure of the water treatment plant, customers wait for information and advisories from the city. And wait. And wait.
The mayor is an "experienced" government officer who sold himself to voters as someone who could "hit the ground running" and successfully handle the running of Trenton. He's brought back lots of equally "experienced" city hall veterans as division and department directors. And he has well paid public information officer. Yet Jackson and company are incredibly tight-lipped when there's a problem with the drinking water supply (or missing employment tax funds or any other negative issue). If team Jackson communicates anything at all, it is late and lacking pertinent details.
Just look at today's notices posted on three municipal websites about the water issues:
Here's Ewing's notice to residents:
Hamilton posted this one:
And Trenton, finally...well after the fact...put up this very spartan announcement.
Finally, just a mere 12 hours after first becoming aware of the problem, the city of Trenton utilized its robocall system to contact TWW customers.
It certainly shows that the first term mayor and his hand chosen team are not up to the task of running a water utility or a city; and certainly not both.
How can the mayor say he's working on economic development when he can't communicate? How can he claim to be making Trenton a better place to work and live when he can't safeguard the water supply? How can anyone feel good about investing in, moving a business to or residing in a city run by a bunch of mute misfits?
It remains to be seen if Jackson is going to run for a second term. As of a week ago, he had not filed his campaign paperwork. And we know he hasn't kept up with his finance reports from the 2014 campaign.
If he does run, there isn't a single voter in Trenton who should give up his or her vote to this failed mayor.
If he doesn't run let us hope he isn't given an appointment in the administration of incoming governor Phil Murphy. We can't think of any one less qualified for a continued government paycheck.
And, if Jackson doesn't run, voters would be well advised to not vote for any candidate or slate that gets a Jackson endorsement.
Eric E. Jackson has failed Trenton and it is time for the voters to fail him.
Wednesday, January 10, 2018
Where's Eric?
In the kerfuffle surrounding last week's notice to Trenton Water Works rate payers that there had yet again been issues with the quality of the water, Trenton's Mayor was absent. Sure, there was the official notice about the high rate of haloacetic acid 5 (dated December 26, 2017 but not slated for release until January 5, 2018. Huh?!?!?). But where was Eric Jackson?
As the 2018 Municipal Election season (aka "silly season") ramps up, we acquired a list of campaign registration sheets from Trenton's Municipal Clerk. Among the 18 people who have filed to run in the May election, there are four challengers for the Mayor's seat. But where is Eric?
We started asking around. Nobody has really seen or directly heard from the mayor in a couple of weeks. He didn't hold a Christmas party for his (still NON-tax exempt) foundation, Moving Trenton Together.
He still hasn't turned in any of the missing quarterly NJ ELEC finance reports for the past three years.
Where is Eric Jackson?
One tidbit we did turn up. Apparently, Mayor Jackson's health hasn't been great. And for that, we are truly sorry. At this time, we have unverified reports that Jackson had some issues with blood clots, possibly in his legs. This is no laughing matter and is reported to have resulted in the Mayor being hospitalized at Capital Health Medical Center in Hopewell. And if it is not the first occurrence of this condition, how well is it being managed?
First and foremost, we hope that Mayor Eric Jackson recovers from this serious medical condition and continues to do what needs to be done to ensure there are no future setbacks.
However, if he has really been out of commission, did he notify the city council? Did he hand over day to day authority to a deputy or acting mayor?
With all of the issues the capital city is experiencing, shouldn't the public be entitled to know if the mayor duly elected to serve them is incapacitated? Should he decide to file his paperwork and run again in this spring's election, wouldn't it be good to know if he is healthy enough to serve the full term?
And, lastly, what does it say about the man's performance in office thus far if he can be out of commission, hospitalized, and no one knows or asks...
...Where's Eric?
As the 2018 Municipal Election season (aka "silly season") ramps up, we acquired a list of campaign registration sheets from Trenton's Municipal Clerk. Among the 18 people who have filed to run in the May election, there are four challengers for the Mayor's seat. But where is Eric?
We started asking around. Nobody has really seen or directly heard from the mayor in a couple of weeks. He didn't hold a Christmas party for his (still NON-tax exempt) foundation, Moving Trenton Together.
He still hasn't turned in any of the missing quarterly NJ ELEC finance reports for the past three years.
Where is Eric Jackson?
One tidbit we did turn up. Apparently, Mayor Jackson's health hasn't been great. And for that, we are truly sorry. At this time, we have unverified reports that Jackson had some issues with blood clots, possibly in his legs. This is no laughing matter and is reported to have resulted in the Mayor being hospitalized at Capital Health Medical Center in Hopewell. And if it is not the first occurrence of this condition, how well is it being managed?
First and foremost, we hope that Mayor Eric Jackson recovers from this serious medical condition and continues to do what needs to be done to ensure there are no future setbacks.
However, if he has really been out of commission, did he notify the city council? Did he hand over day to day authority to a deputy or acting mayor?
With all of the issues the capital city is experiencing, shouldn't the public be entitled to know if the mayor duly elected to serve them is incapacitated? Should he decide to file his paperwork and run again in this spring's election, wouldn't it be good to know if he is healthy enough to serve the full term?
And, lastly, what does it say about the man's performance in office thus far if he can be out of commission, hospitalized, and no one knows or asks...
...Where's Eric?
Tuesday, December 05, 2017
Get your hands out of our pockets!
Did you have one of those friends in college who, whenever a group of you were out together, either left his wallet in the dorm or was a little short or had some other excuse why he or she couldn't pay their share for the night's entertainment? And they always promised they'd make it up to you if you could just take care of their portion of the bill this time?
We kind of get that feeling all over again when we read through the documents that comprise Ordinance 17-80 on this week's Trenton City Council Docket. Approval of this ordinance would grant Woodrose Properties Golden Swan Urban Renewal LLC a ten year tax abatement for the property at 101 South Warren Street.
Previously, we filled you in on some of the history of the property...how the city has bent over backwards for the owner, Woodrose Properties. And we also noted how Woodrose's principal, former Senator Robert Torricelli, has had no problem contributing money to the campaigns of past and present mayors and council members in the city of Trenton.
Let's take a little deeper dive into the Torricelli/Woodrose request for the tax abatement.
On page three of Attachment "A" of the ordinance, the developer describes the proposed project as a
"substantial rehabilitation improvement and conversion of the existing mixed-use building."
In essence, the building owner wants to update the HVAC system and convert the current commercial office space on the upper floors to residential space. The ground floor retail is currently occupied by a Subway sandwich shop (the "restaurant") and a dental office which opened in September of this year.
A little further down in the package, the developer estimates $181,000 in construction costs, $45,000 for professional fees and a marketing/advertising cost of $4,500. This brings the entire cost to $230,500. And the work is anticipated to take 4 months.
They are asking the city to grant a 10 year tax abatement of 10% of the estimated annual revenue of the finished project minus a deduction for a vacancy rate. Per the calculations in the application, the annual net income of the project would be $143,404.80 and the city, if the abatement is granted would receive $14,340 a year in taxes.
Here's what has left us scratching our heads. The developer states in the application that...
OK. If, and that is a big if, there is a strong demand for market-rate apartments, why are they calculating on a vacancy rate? Are they just being conservative in the figuring?
We happen to know someone with rental properties just a block away from the Golden Swan. We asked him about this alleged "strong demand" for market-rate apartments. He suggested that, based upon his experience with his two buildings, the assumption was not true. Our friend admitted that he hasn't under taken a recent study but he noted that Torricelli didn't offer up any proof either.
(NOTE: there is some sort of exhibit referenced in but not included with the documents we received that was pointed to as depicting this demand).
Just to make sure that the city administration on the governing body see how important it is for them to approve this abatement, Torricelli offers up this subtle threat:
Essentially, he says that without the abatement, there can be no conversions and without those, he will "shut down the building."
Does he not realize that the city has ordinances on the books about vacant and abandoned buildings and that should he "shut down" this one, he'd still have to maintain it and keep it secured unless/until it might be sold?
Is blackmailing the city council and the mayor the way to get what one wants?
Folks, we are talking about a private, for-profit investor who obtained the property for $1, had the city do some demo and remediation work for him, gave him various PILOTS on parts of the projects and who has the two large first floor spaces rented. His taxes went up and now he wants the city to cut him a break or he'll pack up and go home.
Not likely. He's got too much other property in town to just walk away.
Nothing about this project screams "revitalization". The work of saving the historic building is already done. The "conversion" is not going to add to the city's employment rolls. Page five of the application clearly states that there will be no additional staff hired to manage the building (and, it should be noted, those that currently do are located outside of the city). They claim that the additional retail space when rented will bring jobs to downtown, but we believe the retail space to already be rented. (It appears as though this package was prepared last spring but only just recently submitted to the city and doesn't take into account that there is now a dental office located in the building). And, of course, there is the ever popular "construction jobs" that will be "created"; an estimated equivalency of 12 full-time jobs over the four month construction period. Is this really worth a 10 year tax abatement in a city strapped for cash?
Why can't Mr. Torricelli reach into his very deep pockets and fund the conversion himself? He certainly isn't shy about opening his checkbook.
A quick and by no means exhaustive search of NJ ELEC records show that since 1981, Torricelli has personally (this is his money, not the money in his various campaign accounts) given over $117,000 to various political campaigns (we actually have records of contributions he's made that for some reason don't show up in the ELEC database and thus aren't included in that number). Over half of that amount, $64,500, was given out since December 24, 2013. (Yes, we thought that was an interesting date, too).
Why did we start counting on Christmas Eve of 2013? Because according to the ELEC records that was the date that Torricelli contributed $2,000 to Eric Jackson's 2014 run for mayor. Between that date and June 5, 2014, Torricelli (and his Woodrose Properties, LLC) gave a total of $6,200 to the Jackson campaign. He exceeded the $2,600 limit for the regular campaign (May election) by giving $1,000 from the LLC (an NJ ELEC no-no). Kevin Moriarty explained it here and here.
As has been noted repeatedly, we have no idea who may have contributed how much to Eric Jackson in the last three years because it has been that long since he has filed a campaign report.
North Ward Councilwoman Marge Caldwell Wilson also received a modest $250 contribution from Torricelli in May of 2014.
Campaign contributions are not the only way that Torricelli shows his generosity. After leaving the senate in the wake of a campaign finance scandal, he set up a private foundation with some of his unused campaign funds.
Unlike Eric Jackson who can't seem to file any paperwork on time, you can find the tax returns from Torricelli's Rosemont Foundation online. Here are links to the ones from 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015.
As we have stated before, foundations and other non-profits set up by public officials offer them ample ways to circumvent campaign finance rules and "spread the wealth." For instance, there was the infamous "Turkey Give Away" on December 22, 2013. We all know it was just a coincidence that he was seeking approval to build a "temporary" (it's still there today, four years later) surface parking lot on the old Pete Lorenzo's restaurant site at about the same time. The fact that his 2013 tax return for the foundation shows over $8,700 spent for the turkeys has no relation to him having gotten the go ahead on his plan.
When you look at the website for the Rosemont Foundation or any of the tax returns, you will see that Torricelli has a soft spot or animal welfare. It shouldn't be a surprise then that in 2014 the foundation donated $1,000 to the Lady Margaret Animal Foundation, set up by Trenton's North Ward Councilwoman, Margaret Caldwell Wilson.
And of course, we cannot forget Mayor Jackson's no longer tax-exempt Moving Trenton Together foundation. The one that conned the good people at the War Memorial into only charging them the (half - price) government rate for renting the theater. Yeah that one.
Well, even though Mayor Jackson couldn't be bothered to file the required 990s, the Rosemont Foundation filed theirs. You guessed it...in 2015 Moving Trenton Together received $2,500 from Torricelli's foundation.
Now, we are not saying that any of this is illegal. And we are not saying that any of Torricelli's largesse is meant to influence any decisions on the part of the Jackson administration, the council or any other government body that can give a thumbs up or down to things like planning and zoning approvals or tax abatements.
What we are saying is that Mr. Torricelli certainly has the ways and means to do the work at the Golden Swan himself. If it is such a good investment that will make the property profitable, then he should dig into his own pocket and keep his hand out of the taxpayer's!
{NOTE: while we were writing this, the Trentonian's David Foster posted a piece on the application for a long term tax abatement. He covers much of the same ground as we have here, but he's got a couple of interesting quotes from Mr. Torricelli.}
We kind of get that feeling all over again when we read through the documents that comprise Ordinance 17-80 on this week's Trenton City Council Docket. Approval of this ordinance would grant Woodrose Properties Golden Swan Urban Renewal LLC a ten year tax abatement for the property at 101 South Warren Street.
Previously, we filled you in on some of the history of the property...how the city has bent over backwards for the owner, Woodrose Properties. And we also noted how Woodrose's principal, former Senator Robert Torricelli, has had no problem contributing money to the campaigns of past and present mayors and council members in the city of Trenton.
Let's take a little deeper dive into the Torricelli/Woodrose request for the tax abatement.
On page three of Attachment "A" of the ordinance, the developer describes the proposed project as a
"substantial rehabilitation improvement and conversion of the existing mixed-use building."
A little further down in the package, the developer estimates $181,000 in construction costs, $45,000 for professional fees and a marketing/advertising cost of $4,500. This brings the entire cost to $230,500. And the work is anticipated to take 4 months.
They are asking the city to grant a 10 year tax abatement of 10% of the estimated annual revenue of the finished project minus a deduction for a vacancy rate. Per the calculations in the application, the annual net income of the project would be $143,404.80 and the city, if the abatement is granted would receive $14,340 a year in taxes.
Here's what has left us scratching our heads. The developer states in the application that...
...based upon the occupancy of the existing apartments...and the location in downtown Trenton (near multiple State Offices and private offices) ...there is a strong demand for market-rate apartments....
OK. If, and that is a big if, there is a strong demand for market-rate apartments, why are they calculating on a vacancy rate? Are they just being conservative in the figuring?
We happen to know someone with rental properties just a block away from the Golden Swan. We asked him about this alleged "strong demand" for market-rate apartments. He suggested that, based upon his experience with his two buildings, the assumption was not true. Our friend admitted that he hasn't under taken a recent study but he noted that Torricelli didn't offer up any proof either.
(NOTE: there is some sort of exhibit referenced in but not included with the documents we received that was pointed to as depicting this demand).
Just to make sure that the city administration on the governing body see how important it is for them to approve this abatement, Torricelli offers up this subtle threat:
Does he not realize that the city has ordinances on the books about vacant and abandoned buildings and that should he "shut down" this one, he'd still have to maintain it and keep it secured unless/until it might be sold?
Is blackmailing the city council and the mayor the way to get what one wants?
Folks, we are talking about a private, for-profit investor who obtained the property for $1, had the city do some demo and remediation work for him, gave him various PILOTS on parts of the projects and who has the two large first floor spaces rented. His taxes went up and now he wants the city to cut him a break or he'll pack up and go home.
Not likely. He's got too much other property in town to just walk away.
Nothing about this project screams "revitalization". The work of saving the historic building is already done. The "conversion" is not going to add to the city's employment rolls. Page five of the application clearly states that there will be no additional staff hired to manage the building (and, it should be noted, those that currently do are located outside of the city). They claim that the additional retail space when rented will bring jobs to downtown, but we believe the retail space to already be rented. (It appears as though this package was prepared last spring but only just recently submitted to the city and doesn't take into account that there is now a dental office located in the building). And, of course, there is the ever popular "construction jobs" that will be "created"; an estimated equivalency of 12 full-time jobs over the four month construction period. Is this really worth a 10 year tax abatement in a city strapped for cash?
Why can't Mr. Torricelli reach into his very deep pockets and fund the conversion himself? He certainly isn't shy about opening his checkbook.
A quick and by no means exhaustive search of NJ ELEC records show that since 1981, Torricelli has personally (this is his money, not the money in his various campaign accounts) given over $117,000 to various political campaigns (we actually have records of contributions he's made that for some reason don't show up in the ELEC database and thus aren't included in that number). Over half of that amount, $64,500, was given out since December 24, 2013. (Yes, we thought that was an interesting date, too).
Why did we start counting on Christmas Eve of 2013? Because according to the ELEC records that was the date that Torricelli contributed $2,000 to Eric Jackson's 2014 run for mayor. Between that date and June 5, 2014, Torricelli (and his Woodrose Properties, LLC) gave a total of $6,200 to the Jackson campaign. He exceeded the $2,600 limit for the regular campaign (May election) by giving $1,000 from the LLC (an NJ ELEC no-no). Kevin Moriarty explained it here and here.
As has been noted repeatedly, we have no idea who may have contributed how much to Eric Jackson in the last three years because it has been that long since he has filed a campaign report.
North Ward Councilwoman Marge Caldwell Wilson also received a modest $250 contribution from Torricelli in May of 2014.
Campaign contributions are not the only way that Torricelli shows his generosity. After leaving the senate in the wake of a campaign finance scandal, he set up a private foundation with some of his unused campaign funds.
Unlike Eric Jackson who can't seem to file any paperwork on time, you can find the tax returns from Torricelli's Rosemont Foundation online. Here are links to the ones from 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015.
As we have stated before, foundations and other non-profits set up by public officials offer them ample ways to circumvent campaign finance rules and "spread the wealth." For instance, there was the infamous "Turkey Give Away" on December 22, 2013. We all know it was just a coincidence that he was seeking approval to build a "temporary" (it's still there today, four years later) surface parking lot on the old Pete Lorenzo's restaurant site at about the same time. The fact that his 2013 tax return for the foundation shows over $8,700 spent for the turkeys has no relation to him having gotten the go ahead on his plan.
Well, even though Mayor Jackson couldn't be bothered to file the required 990s, the Rosemont Foundation filed theirs. You guessed it...in 2015 Moving Trenton Together received $2,500 from Torricelli's foundation.
Now, we are not saying that any of this is illegal. And we are not saying that any of Torricelli's largesse is meant to influence any decisions on the part of the Jackson administration, the council or any other government body that can give a thumbs up or down to things like planning and zoning approvals or tax abatements.
What we are saying is that Mr. Torricelli certainly has the ways and means to do the work at the Golden Swan himself. If it is such a good investment that will make the property profitable, then he should dig into his own pocket and keep his hand out of the taxpayer's!
{NOTE: while we were writing this, the Trentonian's David Foster posted a piece on the application for a long term tax abatement. He covers much of the same ground as we have here, but he's got a couple of interesting quotes from Mr. Torricelli.}
Monday, December 04, 2017
How much can the city afford to keep giving?
Former Senator Seeks Tax Abatement For Downtown Property
Back in August of this year, Kevin Moriarty, revisted the topic of what he called the Revaluation of La-La Land. It was a topic he'd written about it in January, twice in fact. And now Torricelli wants a long-term tax abatement.
Well, we say "Too bad!" Senator Torricelli has taken more than enough from Trenton. It's time he starts paying his fair share.
The Golden Swan property was acquired by Torricelli (through his Woodrose Properties Golden Swan LLC) in 2005. He bought it from the city of Trenton for the grand sum of one dollar. In December of 2007, the city granted Torricelli UEZ funds to do some of the renovation work on the buildings. (This was all covered in some of our earliest postings on this blog. You can find one story here and another here.)
EDIT: courtesy of Kevin Moriarty, we now have a copy of Ordinance 17-80 wherein the developer is requesting a 10 year tax abatement so he can essentially replace some of the buildings systems and convert rental office space to rental residential space. He is doing this under threat of abandoning the project altogether if he doesn't get the abatement because the properties are not profitable.
It was pointed out at the time that there were some serious monetary contributions that flowed from Torricelli to then Mayor Doug Palmer's campaign and foundation. Not that that in anyway influenced the city's decision to sell the property for $1 and then throw in UEZ money later on.
After a decade, with a Subway store located on the ground floor and some office and residential space above, Torricelli is coming to the city, again; hand out; looking for a "long-term tax abatement." All the while, the everyday folks are scrambling to meet their newly increased property tax bills. Doesn't quite seem fair, does it?
Now, we can't point to any possible contributions from Torricelli to current Mayor Eric Jackson's campaign or private foundation that may have influenced the decision to bring the tax abatement to council for approval. But only because Jackson has not filed the required tax returns and election reports where such contributions, if there were any, might show up.
What we do know is this, any member of Trenton's governing body who votes to approve this long-term tax abatement is showing that they care more for a non-resident investor who has continually made money off of the city's largesse than they do for the people who actually voted them into office. The best move the council could take would be to vote this ordinance down immediately.
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
Fixed price
Yesterday we took you through the saga of the never formed Trenton Employment Commission and the money spent ($23,000+) on Hill Consultants to coordinate Mayor Jackson's invisible Local Employment Initiative. There is so much wrong with that situation that we neglected to include one other little tiny problem that needs to be addressed.
On July 8, 2015 then director of Housing and Economic Development for the City of Trenton Monique King-Viehland prepared and sent a memo to city Business Administrator Terry McEwen. In that memo she recaps the legislative history behind the implementation of the Trenton Resident Employment Policy. She mentions the request for proposal from parties interested in serving as a coordinator for the development and implementation of the program and that Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the RFP. King-Viehland then goes on to recommend awarding the one year, $50,000 contract to Hill Consultants.
There is another document that may have been attached to that memo (the docs as received from the clerk's office were somewhat disorganized). It's a tally sheet of sorts summarizing the results of the RFP process.
The document shows there was only one response to the RFP, that of Hill Consultants. Further down the page, there is a line for "Hourly rate" and that rate is clearly entered in as $100.00.
Interestingly, on the six invoices Charles Hill submitted to the city, the rate is posted as $125.00 per hour.
Nowhere in any of the documents provided in response to our OPRA request is there anything indicating a change in the hourly rate, up or down. Or a correction to the rate published on the tally sheet.
So what happened? How did the rate jump from $100 per hour to $125 per hour?
Was it a clerical error made while the purchasing department was preparing the RFP evaluation sheet? Was the rate always $125 an hour or did the consultant just arbitrarily and unilaterally increase his rate?
In an administration where financial missteps seem to occur with regularity, why would we be surprised if this friend and supporter of the mayor felt comfortable in increasing his billing rate and nobody questioned it.
Maybe if the city council decides to take this up with Mayor Jackson, they can find out why the hourly rate changed between the July and November of 2015.
On July 8, 2015 then director of Housing and Economic Development for the City of Trenton Monique King-Viehland prepared and sent a memo to city Business Administrator Terry McEwen. In that memo she recaps the legislative history behind the implementation of the Trenton Resident Employment Policy. She mentions the request for proposal from parties interested in serving as a coordinator for the development and implementation of the program and that Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the RFP. King-Viehland then goes on to recommend awarding the one year, $50,000 contract to Hill Consultants.
There is another document that may have been attached to that memo (the docs as received from the clerk's office were somewhat disorganized). It's a tally sheet of sorts summarizing the results of the RFP process.
The document shows there was only one response to the RFP, that of Hill Consultants. Further down the page, there is a line for "Hourly rate" and that rate is clearly entered in as $100.00.
Interestingly, on the six invoices Charles Hill submitted to the city, the rate is posted as $125.00 per hour.
Nowhere in any of the documents provided in response to our OPRA request is there anything indicating a change in the hourly rate, up or down. Or a correction to the rate published on the tally sheet.
So what happened? How did the rate jump from $100 per hour to $125 per hour?
Was it a clerical error made while the purchasing department was preparing the RFP evaluation sheet? Was the rate always $125 an hour or did the consultant just arbitrarily and unilaterally increase his rate?
In an administration where financial missteps seem to occur with regularity, why would we be surprised if this friend and supporter of the mayor felt comfortable in increasing his billing rate and nobody questioned it.
Maybe if the city council decides to take this up with Mayor Jackson, they can find out why the hourly rate changed between the July and November of 2015.
Monday, November 13, 2017
Whatever happened to the City of Trenton's Resident Employment Initiative?
Trenton Mayor Eric
Jackson not only rates a failing grade with regards to the management and
reporting of his campaign finances (3 years of past due filings) and his Moving Trenton Together private foundation, he’s earns a big fat zero for his Trenton
Resident Employment Initiative.
In September of 2014 Trenton City Council passed ordinance 14-42 and created the Trenton Employment Commission. This was done to support the administration’s new policy of seeking at least 25% local employment by contractors on government funded/sponsored projects. The Trenton Employment Commission was to be comprised of the Mayor or his/her designee, a representative from the City Council, a representative from a labor union and four residents of Trenton (the labor rep and the four residents to be appointed by the Mayor).
The stated purpose of the commission is to "meet monthly to oversee the implementation, enforcement and monitoring of the Trenton Resident Employment Policy."
The ordinance was introduced by the Council President (we assume on behalf of the Administration) in August of 2014 just over a month after Jackson took office. The introduction and the adoption by council a month later were both unanimous.
It wasn’t until 13 months after the adoption of the ordinance that the city council approved resolution 15-463, a one year, $50,000 contract with Hill Consultants LLC to coordinate and implement the Trenton Resident Employment Initiative. Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the city’s RFP.
Not surprising for Trenton’s local government, there was some controversy at the time. The contract was pulled from consideration in July of 2015 because ofquestions from the city overseers at the Department of Community Affairs.
In September of 2014 Trenton City Council passed ordinance 14-42 and created the Trenton Employment Commission. This was done to support the administration’s new policy of seeking at least 25% local employment by contractors on government funded/sponsored projects. The Trenton Employment Commission was to be comprised of the Mayor or his/her designee, a representative from the City Council, a representative from a labor union and four residents of Trenton (the labor rep and the four residents to be appointed by the Mayor).
The stated purpose of the commission is to "meet monthly to oversee the implementation, enforcement and monitoring of the Trenton Resident Employment Policy."
The ordinance was introduced by the Council President (we assume on behalf of the Administration) in August of 2014 just over a month after Jackson took office. The introduction and the adoption by council a month later were both unanimous.
It wasn’t until 13 months after the adoption of the ordinance that the city council approved resolution 15-463, a one year, $50,000 contract with Hill Consultants LLC to coordinate and implement the Trenton Resident Employment Initiative. Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the city’s RFP.
Not surprising for Trenton’s local government, there was some controversy at the time. The contract was pulled from consideration in July of 2015 because ofquestions from the city overseers at the Department of Community Affairs.
It has been two
years since Hill Consultants was retained. What has happened since?
Very little, it seems.
Very little, it seems.
Records obtained via
OPRA request from the city show that $23,000 of the approved $50,000 was paid to Hill Consultants between December 2015 and June 2016. After May of 2016,
Hill Consultants stopped billing the city. There is no documentation as to why
and very little in the way of work product to show for the time and money
spent.
And when asked, the city replied that the Employment Commission never met nor was anyone even appointed to serve on it.
As noted above, Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the city’s RFP for the Trenton Employment Policy coordinator. The firm’s principal, Charles Hill, is credited with “over 10 years of experience in both the government, not for profit and private sector” in the documents included in the proposal to the city.
Reading through the proposal and researching the firm reveals a couple of ironies. First, Hill Consultants lists an office address in Trenton. According to forms included in the proposal, Charles Hill lists an out of state home address. In a form required under the very initiative he was being hired to coordinate, each contractor or subcontractor must report to the city the number of Trenton residents hired. In this case, none. Not that it was required but the consultant hired to coordinate this local employment initiative was himself not a city resident at the time he was awarded the contract!
The proposal also states that Hill Consultants is a subsidiary of Falcon Ventures, a private equity firm. The website for Falcon lists the same West State Street address as Hill Consultants. New Jersey business records show that in July of 2016 Hill Consultants lost its business status for failure to fileannual reports for two consecutive years. (Sound familiar to anyone?) FalconVentures and Falcon Investments (all part of the series of companies created by Charles Hill) lost their business registration status in June of this year.
And when asked, the city replied that the Employment Commission never met nor was anyone even appointed to serve on it.
As noted above, Hill Consultants was the only respondent to the city’s RFP for the Trenton Employment Policy coordinator. The firm’s principal, Charles Hill, is credited with “over 10 years of experience in both the government, not for profit and private sector” in the documents included in the proposal to the city.
Reading through the proposal and researching the firm reveals a couple of ironies. First, Hill Consultants lists an office address in Trenton. According to forms included in the proposal, Charles Hill lists an out of state home address. In a form required under the very initiative he was being hired to coordinate, each contractor or subcontractor must report to the city the number of Trenton residents hired. In this case, none. Not that it was required but the consultant hired to coordinate this local employment initiative was himself not a city resident at the time he was awarded the contract!
The proposal also states that Hill Consultants is a subsidiary of Falcon Ventures, a private equity firm. The website for Falcon lists the same West State Street address as Hill Consultants. New Jersey business records show that in July of 2016 Hill Consultants lost its business status for failure to fileannual reports for two consecutive years. (Sound familiar to anyone?) FalconVentures and Falcon Investments (all part of the series of companies created by Charles Hill) lost their business registration status in June of this year.
That’s
right, the non-resident business consultant failed to file and not just for the consultant
company but for the other LLC’s he was a part of. More irony.
An aside: During our records search we also discovered Trenton Partners for (Economic) Development was formed between Charles Hill, Anthony Stewart and Carmen Melendez (she of Tony Mack fame) in February of 2009. That company has also had its business status revoked for failure to file annual reports. And its IRS tax exempt status. The pattern continues.
Next we looked at the invoices submitted to the city by Charles Hill for his services. There are six of them, one for each month, November 2015 through April 2016.
Most of the items listed are for meetings or conference calls with Diana Rogers, the director of Housing and Economic Development for the city. There is one, one hour meeting with Mayor Jackson. There are several blocks of time charged for “Meeting with Hill Consulting Team”, which is a little odd because as far as we can tell, Hill Consultants is a one person shop. (Hill billed time for meeting with himself?)
There is rarely any comment about subject or topics discussed at these meeting or in these phone calls and when there is it simply states something like “discuss Resident Employment Tasks”. Well, isn’t that rather evident since that was what Hill was hired for? What about the meat of those meetings; what tasks, specifically, were discussed?
In the invoice marked April 2016, submitted for work performed in March of that year, there is finally some time marked for creating work product. Specifically, 10 hours were billed for the development of a Section 3 conflict of interest policy and 30 hours for an overview and presentation for the commission.
We took a look at the conflict of interest document and it seemed pretty straight forward, boiler plate type language that had been formatted to fit into what we presume to be the Trenton city code book style. A quick Google search turned up various links to similar conflict of interest forms. It sure didn’t take us any 10 hours to do that. A good cut, paste and format session would probably take no more than two hours, three tops.
The work claimed for the overview and presentation to the commission is really intriguing. First of all, we had already established that the commission was never formed and thus never met. Fifteen hours to create the never used powerpoint presentation seems a little high to us.
There are was another combined 10 hours charged for working on FAQ and flow chart attachments to the HUD Section 3 guidelines. Again, seems a little high but what do we know. Maybe Hill is a slow, methodical worker.
What did raise some concerns was the five hours of “Meetings with Community Groups”. There are no specifics given for these meetings. No dates, times, or attendance lists were provided. How does anyone even know if these meetings actually occurred or not? Wouldn’t a prudent steward of public money require and retain back up for auditing purposes?
The invoice labeled May 2016 for hours worked in April also includes mention of meetings with local contractors and community organizations plus development of an outreach document. We received no example of the document from the city. Again there was no proof that any meetings were held, when they were held, or who attended.
We reached out to noted local contractor Tracey Syphax to see if he had been contacted or made aware of any meetings. His response was that he had no interaction with the consultant nor was he aware of any local contractor who benefited from this program.
We also inquired of John Harmon who leads the Trenton-based African American Chamber of Commerce of New Jersey if he had any contact with Hill or the city with regards to this local employment initiative. His response mirrored Tracey Syphax’s; No contact.
In amongst the papers we did receive from the city was an agenda for an April14, 2016 meeting of the Section 3 Local Hiring Commission. Again, when we followed up with the city we were told the commission was never formed and no meetings were ever held.
The January PO, and all subsequent ones, use the same number of 16-05251. In fact she uses the exact same PO, with Hill’s verification signature dated in January, 2016, just adding handwritten notes telling what month it was for, what the amount being billed that month is, and then the check number that was issued to pay it. We’re not certified municipal comptrollers or finance directors but this doesn’t appear to be the best, cleanest record keeping.
Do they city’s auditors ever catch any of this stuff?
Where is the city council in all of this. Seven of them passed the ordinance creating the commission that was never formed; the commission one of their own was supposed to sit on. Are they not the least bit curious as to what happened to the commission?
Five of them voted to hire the consultant for $50,000 for a year. He billed the city for almost half of that with little to show. Six months later, he was gone. Aren’t they the least bit concerned about what happened?
And what about the Department of Community Affairs? They had concerns at the outset, did they not think it prudent to check back with the city to see how things were progressing? Or maybe their leaving it for the incoming administration of Governor-elect Phil Murphy to sort out. It's announced that incoming Lt. Governor Sheila Oliver will head up the DCA, maybe she can straighten this mess out.
Regardless, it’s yet another failure for the city; another plan of Jackson’s that was never fully executed.
Thursday, November 09, 2017
Intermezzo
What do you think about this?
In April, 2016, the Trenton Housing Authority hired Mayor Eric Jackson's sister, Pamela Brooks, to fill an $85,000 position as the Director of Resident and Community Services.
You can find the job description from the THA here.
On the last page, the education requirements are listed:
As pointed out in David Foster's Trentonian article linked above and confirmed by Brooks' resume, she has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Rutgers.
That certainly isn't the MSW (Masters of Social Work) that was preferred in the job description.
In April, 2016, the Trenton Housing Authority hired Mayor Eric Jackson's sister, Pamela Brooks, to fill an $85,000 position as the Director of Resident and Community Services.
You can find the job description from the THA here.
On the last page, the education requirements are listed:
EDUCATION
Required: Bachelor's degree in Social Sciences, Urban Studies, Public Administration or related field.
Preferred: MSW
As pointed out in David Foster's Trentonian article linked above and confirmed by Brooks' resume, she has a Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Rutgers.
That certainly isn't the MSW (Masters of Social Work) that was preferred in the job description.
Wednesday, November 08, 2017
Misleading Trenton Together
Misrepresentation and misstatement seem to be a family
affair for Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson and his sister, Pamela Brooks. Their
handling of Jackson’s Moving Trenton Together private foundation provides
ongoing evidence that they have no idea about how to properly manage their
affairs and have no problem trying to cover up by giving misinformation.
The foundation lost its tax-exempt status with the IRS for failing to file the required tax returns for three consecutive years. It has lost its New Jersey state business entity status for not filing the required annual reports for two consecutive years. MTT never registered with the state charitable organization directory. On top of all that, it appears as though MTT used Jackson’s title as mayor to get the “government” rate for renting the War Memorial for holiday concerts when they should have paid a higher, non-profit rate. And then there is the possibility that individuals on the city of Trenton payroll may have been taking care of some MTT business while on the city’s clock.
The foundation lost its tax-exempt status with the IRS for failing to file the required tax returns for three consecutive years. It has lost its New Jersey state business entity status for not filing the required annual reports for two consecutive years. MTT never registered with the state charitable organization directory. On top of all that, it appears as though MTT used Jackson’s title as mayor to get the “government” rate for renting the War Memorial for holiday concerts when they should have paid a higher, non-profit rate. And then there is the possibility that individuals on the city of Trenton payroll may have been taking care of some MTT business while on the city’s clock.
Politicians often set up some sort of non-profit as a means to circumvent election campaign finance rules on who can give money, how much can be given (plus offering a tax deduction to donors) and what the money can be spent on. MTT was Formed in December of 2014 by Jackson, his wife, Denice, and his sister, Pam Brooks. In an article published that month, Times reporter Jenna Pizzi wrote, “The mayor said he wanted to form the group, rather than partner with the many nonprofits already registered in Trenton, because there are efforts he would like to move on that will compliment the activities of existing groups.”
While there is nothing overtly illegal or improper about setting up a non-profit like MTT, care should be taken to keep it separate from any official city business. No work should be performed for the corporation by city employees while on city time; no city resources expended in the execution of MTT work, etc. (Just look at the recent scandal involving the Friends of Mercer County Parks non-profit and the Bannon brothers as an example of what can happen).
Corporations in New Jersey must file an annual report. At its most basic, it is a five-minute on-line exercise followed by a payment to the state. It keeps the business status active for a year. The state sends out notices of renewal to the registered agent of record three months prior to the due date. The website provides all current information and not only allows you to file the current report, but you can resolve any deficiencies in prior filing years. Failure to file for two consecutive years results in the state revoking the business’s status.
Moving Trenton Together never filed any annual reports and had its business registration revoked in July of 2016.
The registered agent for MTT is David Minchello. His name also appears on the application for IRS tax exempt status. At the time of formation, Minchello was employed by the city of Trenton as it Law Director. Did he prepare and submit the paperwork on city time or his own? We really can’t say.
We do know this; Minchello used the address of his firm, Antonelli Minchello PC, in Union when registering MTT in December of 2014. In the spring of 2015, the partners closed their firm and joined the DeCotiis Fitzpatrick & Cole firm. Questions arose surrounding the fact that Minchello was the city law director and his new firm had a contract to work for the city as well. He left the city’s employ in the summer of 2015.
When Minchello resigned as law director for the city, nobody thought to change the registered agent. Renewal notices were likely sent to Minchello’s former address and not forwarded. Had Jackson/MTT been an actual client of Minchello, would he not have taken care to see that the records were updated and/or a new agent listed? Or did Minchello feel this “duty” was no longer his responsibility because he was no longer a Jackson appointee/city employee?
Certainly, neither Jackson, his wife, nor his sister could be bothered to pay attention to the legal necessities of paperwork regarding their private foundation. It’s easily done, again, on line. But they couldn’t be bothered. So the business registration has lapsed for failure to file.
Charities in New Jersey are supposed to register with the Division of ConsumerAffairs. There are exemptions for charities which receive less than $10,000 in annual gross receipts. It is possible that MTT falls into the category, but we don’t know because they haven’t filed any tax returns (more on that in a minute). We do know that a search of the NJ Charitable Organization database turns up no filing for Moving Trenton Together. Doug Palmer’s Trenton First Initiative is there. So is the now defunct Tony Mack Cares Foundation. Even presumed Mayoral candidate Paul Perez’s “Partnerships for Trenton” non-profit has filed the required reports{Edited for clarity}. There is nothing from or about Jackson’s MTT.
The Trentonian reported in December of 2016 that MTT had yet to file any tax returns. Indeed, in August, the IRS published the revocation of MTT’s tax-exempt status for failing to file tax returns for three consecutive years. As a private foundation, MTT was required to file the 990-PF form. Yet they failed to do so for any of their first three years in existence…2014, 2015, or 2016.
Even after the published reports of December 2016, MTT failed to file their returns. As of May of this year the IRS deemed them delinquent and revoked the non-profits tax exempt status. Public notice was posted to the IRS website in August of this year.
The Trentonian reported the following from Jackson: “With the filing, you get an initial couple years to file it,” the first-term mayor said. “We had attempted to do it internally. There were some errors with it. It came back rejected and we didn’t get it back timely. Now, I have a certified public accountant (CPA) group that’s working on it as we speak to get it done so I can get my reinstatement. We’re curing that now.”Unfortunately, Jackson’s statement is incorrect. Organizations must file a tax return with the IRS each and every year. In fact, it says so very clearly in the IRS determination letter sent to Jackson’s home address advising him of MTT receiving tax exempt status:
“You’re required to file Form 990-PF, Return of Private Foundation or Section 4947 (a) (1) Trust Treated as Private Foundation, annually, whether or not you have income or activity during the year. If you don’t file a required return or notice for three consecutive years, your exempt status will be automatically revoked. “There is nothing ambiguous about that statement. MTT was required to file. Period. There is no pass given for “an initial couple of years.”
As for the statement
that the returns were filed but had errors and came back rejected, we wanted to
see if that was true. We submitted an FOIA request to the IRS for copies of any
returns filed by MTT, erroneous or not. The response came back
stating the 990s were "either unavailable, aren't open to public inspection under Section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code, or destroyed (if it has been six years since the end of the processing year)".
We know that it hasn’t been six years since the end of the processing year because MTT was only founded in 2014 and thus ruled out that reason for no documents being available.
We checked Section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code and determined that it wasn’t applicable to any returns filed by MTT.
That left open the possibility that there aren’t any records available because none were ever filed. To check on that, we called the IRS and spoke with a very nice fellow who answered a few questions with the adviso that he could only give general responses but that I could “read between the lines” to understand what he was saying.
First, we inquired if a tax-exempt organization is a Private Foundation but files the incorrect tax form three years running, would they have their status revoked. He answered in the affirmative.
Then we asked if, as in the case above, the wrong 990s had been filed would there still be records available. He answered in the affirmative.
Anticipating my next question regarding MTT specifically, he answered "At this time, there are no records available."
We know that it hasn’t been six years since the end of the processing year because MTT was only founded in 2014 and thus ruled out that reason for no documents being available.
We checked Section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code and determined that it wasn’t applicable to any returns filed by MTT.
That left open the possibility that there aren’t any records available because none were ever filed. To check on that, we called the IRS and spoke with a very nice fellow who answered a few questions with the adviso that he could only give general responses but that I could “read between the lines” to understand what he was saying.
First, we inquired if a tax-exempt organization is a Private Foundation but files the incorrect tax form three years running, would they have their status revoked. He answered in the affirmative.
Then we asked if, as in the case above, the wrong 990s had been filed would there still be records available. He answered in the affirmative.
Anticipating my next question regarding MTT specifically, he answered "At this time, there are no records available."
We take this to mean that there are no records of any 990s filed by MTT because none were filed.
This directly contradicts Jackson’s statement that they filed but the form had errors and was returned to him. That simply does not appear to be the case at all. (As of the date of publication, MTT's tax exempt status is still listed as revoked for failure to file on the IRS website).
In the off chance we are drawing an incorrect conclusion, all Mayor Jackson must do is produce copies of the forms that he says were filed in error and returned. And if they have really engaged a CPA who is “working on curing that now”, show proof. It’s that simple.
With no tax returns available that report income and
expenditures for the non-profit, we decided to look more closely into the shows
MTT put on at the Patriots Theater in December 2014, 2015, and 2016. We
submitted an Open Public Records Act request for the contracts and
correspondence related to the three events.
We found out that MTT paid the “government” rate of $1500 for renting the theater, a 50% savings over the published rate of $3000 for not-for-profit groups. Interestingly, on the War Memorial’s own website there is no“government” rate but rather a “State Agency” rate available “only to state agency clients conducting government business.” We find it hard to see how MTT meets the definition that would qualify them for the discounted rental rate.
First, MTT by design is supposed to be an entity separate and distinct from the city of Trenton. It is therefore NOT an agency of municipal, county or state government. Secondly, per its incorporation documents, MTT was created for the business purpose of [presenting] “cultural events”. Hardly government business.
We raised the question of the rental rates to individuals at the state and were told,
We found out that MTT paid the “government” rate of $1500 for renting the theater, a 50% savings over the published rate of $3000 for not-for-profit groups. Interestingly, on the War Memorial’s own website there is no“government” rate but rather a “State Agency” rate available “only to state agency clients conducting government business.” We find it hard to see how MTT meets the definition that would qualify them for the discounted rental rate.
First, MTT by design is supposed to be an entity separate and distinct from the city of Trenton. It is therefore NOT an agency of municipal, county or state government. Secondly, per its incorporation documents, MTT was created for the business purpose of [presenting] “cultural events”. Hardly government business.
We raised the question of the rental rates to individuals at the state and were told,
“As previously communicated, the City of Trenton was represented as the Lessee for these events, so in keeping with past practice, the government rate was charged accordingly.”“The payment arrangements that are made between the Lessee, a sponsor, or a 3rd party does not impact the rental rate.”“Also, the identification of a concert for the Citizens of Trenton at no charge was deemed a municipal event.”
Indeed, on the three rental applications for the Patriots Theater, the listed organization/Presenter/Renter is listed as “Mayor Eric Jackson.” Was this done to subtly suggest that it was the City of Trenton renting the hall and thus qualify for the lower rental rate?
On the application for 2014, the check box for the renter’s non-profit status was not checked. On the 2015 and 2016 applications, the “Non-profit” box is checked, but not the government one. The War Memorial staff didn’t seem to pick up on the fact that it was not a government agency holding a government business event at the theater.
All the contact information regarding the rentals was directed to Ms. Brooks…we presume at either her or Jackson's home address and personal email (she’s not on the city payroll so there shouldn’t be a city email address for her). From the initial email correspondence in September of 2014 (before the non-profit was officially formed) Ms. Brooks identifies herself as working “on behalf of Trenton Mayor Eric Jackson” and often refers to the Mayor’s concert giving the impression it was a city event.
The security deposit for the December 2014 concert was a “starter” check such as one gets when one first opens a checking account. It was handwritten with the Payer Name and address listed as “Eric E. Jackson, Mayor” and the mayor’s home address and signed by Gilbert K. Bell. Mr. Bell is (or was at the time – we don’t know if there’s been any changes since Jackson hasn’t filed any campaign reports in three years) the treasurer of the Mr. Jackson’s Election Campaign. A second check bore the handwritten Payer name and address of Moving Trenton Together, and was signed by Jackson himself. In either event, this was NOT a city event and we maintain it should not have qualified for the lower rental rate.
And there’s another question here…the security deposit check signed by Mr. Bell in October 22 of 2014 bears the handwritten number “008”. The second check, signed by Jackson, was dated December 18, 2014 and hand numbered 0002. It is possible that Jackson was originally going to pay for this from his campaign treasury and then decided to form the non-profit to cover the expenses. Probably because of the fewer restrictions on the donations to and expenditures from a non-profit compared to an election campaign account.
The 2015 and 2016 concerts saw checks written on fully printed checks with the Payer name and address of Moving Trenton Together at the Melrose Ave address. The 2015 checks were drawn on an account at Wells Fargo (same as the 2014 checks) but signed by Jackson himself. The 2016 checks were drawn on an account at Investors Bank and signed by Ms. Brooks.
Despite lots of evidence to the contrary, the state seemed to accept that Mayor Eric Jackson’s name on the contracts somehow made this a city (government) activity. Ms. Brooks never appears to offer up the information that this was not an official city sponsored event. Was it deliberate? You decide.
In another email thread received via the same OPRA request we find that at the beginning of 2017, MTT still owed the state money for the 2014 and 2015 rentals. Starting on February 10 of this year, the CFO of the Department of State reported to Ms. Brooks that MTT still owed the state a little over $3200 dollars. It took nearly a month to resolve the problem. The balances were paid by credit card. The outstanding $1000 balance from the 2014 show stemmed from Brooks claiming she thought the security deposit check had been cashed to cover the balance and only found out it had been returned after going through the mayor’s records.
Ms. Brooks should have paid closer attention. On the second page of the standard lease agreement with the War Memorial, it is explained in paragraph 3 (Payment of Fees) that:
A security damage/cleaning deposit of $1000.00 shall also be paid no less than 14 days prior to the event. (Please make this a separate check). The building security deposit of $1000 will be held by the Lessor until after the Event and consequent inspection of the facility. After a satisfactory inspection of the facility, and the after the Lessee has satisfied any and all financial and other obligations under the contract, the building security deposit will be returned to the Lessee.
Yet again, neither Jackson or Brooks seem capable of reading, comprehending and/or following simple directions. The check was returned and not applied to the balance due, just as is spelled out in the rental documents.
Jackson and Brooks and company repeatedly fail to do the right thing in a timely manner. The explanations offered when questioned about their ineptitude are always weak and don’t appear to stand up to scrutiny. Jackson’s method of operating is sloppy at best and may border on the unethical.
Trentonians, think about this if he decides to seek a second term.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)