Think this through

Learning is a life long task. It is the way we acquire the information we need to function.

Decisions should be made after gathering as much information possible.

It follows then, that learning leads to better decision making. (Noting that not everyone will derive the exact same assumption from the same set of data).

This is the essence of what those in attendance should take away from Thursday night's city council meeting that mostly centered on the issues of the city's floundering hotel.

Things learned.

Some key facts came to light that many did not know and others may have known but forgotten over the intervening years since the hotel project was first proposed. Some of the information was revealed via simple research into public documents. Some of it was explained by the city's extremely capable bond attorney, Ed McManimon.

• The Lafayette Yard Community Development Corporation was incorporated in June of 1998 by Shelly Zeiger. The other "trustees" besides the incorporator were Acquest Realty's David Ong, along with Bill Watson, Allan Mallach, and Gwendolyn Long. These five were, according to the incorporation document, "designated by the Mayor of the City" and two others were to be "designated by the City Council at a later date." Mr. Zeiger was the registered agent for the corporation.
• The purpose of the LYCDC was to assist the city, parking authority and state in redeveloping the parcel of land into a hotel, conference center and parking garage.
• The LYCDC, when adopting its bylaws, made the Mayor the appointing authority, with advice and consent of the City Council.
• The LYCDC, NOT the City of Trenton, owns the hotel.
• The LYCDC, NOT the City of Trenton, issued the tax-exempt bonds to raise some of the money for the project.
• The City of Trenton is the guarantor of the bonds. That is, if there is not enough revenue generated by the hotel operations to cover the payments of principle and interest on the bonds, the City of Trenton must make the payments. Since the hotel has, generally, not made a profit that means the city has made the payments and likely will continue to do so.
• There are other, subordinate loans from the state and the Trenton Parking Authority that helped finance the project.
• While the City of Trenton is responsible for the debt incurred to finance the development, it is NOT obligated to cover any operating shortfalls.
• In order for the hotel to be sold, the title has to first transfer to the City of Trenton from the LYCDC.

What this means, in short, is that the LYCDC holds title to the property and operates it via a contract with a management company. The LYCDC is technically the borrower of the money used to construct the facility. The city is the backup...if there are not profits from hotel operations to pay the lenders back, the city must (and has been) make the payments. The city is not obligated to honor the cash calls made by the LYCDC to cover operating deficits.

Take a minute and let that sink in.

Ok, so what do we do?

There is universal agreement that the hotel needs to be sold. There is not so much agreement on the where, when, how and to whom,

It is also pretty much agreed that the hotel is more attractive to a buyer as an open and operating concern rather than closed.

To continue operations after the current agreements with Waterford (the management company actually "running" the hotel) and Marriott (the brand or "flag"), a new computer management system must be purchased and up and running. (This is because the current system in use is Marriott's proprietary system and when they go, it goes. It is that simple.)

There will also be expenses incurred removing all "Marriott" branded items from the property.

This is the $200,000 in transition expenses approved at last night's council meeting. This will allow Marshall, the incoming management company, to operate the hotel after midnight, June 14 when the property becomes "the-hotel-formerly-known-as-the-Trenton-Marriott".

What is not settled is whether to proceed with the re-flagging of the hotel as a Wyndham or operate it independently. Here there are differences of opinion.

Many in the business community, along with the LYCDC board majority, place importance on having a branded hotel. Their arguments range from the improved market recognition a flag carries to implied "standards" of service and facilities. Some say the public seek out name brand hotels when traveling because they are known entities.

Of course, running with a flag can mean additional costs. There is reportedly a $10,000 application fee just to be considered for the Wyndham name. Then there will be some kind of license fee, franchise fee, etc. to actually put the name on the property, tie into its reservation system and utilize the chain's marketing muscle. In addition, we cannot overlook the $3 million in property improvements that Wyndham wants done. These have thus far been described in reports as essentially cosmetic makeovers of the bar area and freshening up the decor in the guest rooms.

In the other camp are those who feel the hotel could operate just fine without a brand for the very brief (but as yet undefined) period between losing the Marriott name and being sold. The thought is that if you are coming to Trenton and inclined to stay at a hotel here in town, you will really have no choice. A brand name is not going to make a difference. Surely, Marshall can operate a property to "chain" standards without the benefit or expense of the brand name. The money saved on application and franchise fees can be freed up for marketing and for those property improvements and maintenance that are actually necessary.

Would operating independently eliminate the need of further bonding?

Operating independently might eliminate the need to issue more bonds to cover this expensive bar makeover and such. However, there are undoubtedly some repair and maintenance issues that should be addressed as part of "polishing this gem" (as one speaker referred to it last night) and readying it for sale.

There is another option that bears consideration.

Bond counsel Ed McManimon noted that the city could issue taxable bonds in the amount equal to the LYCDC’s tax exempt bonds, essentially paying off the LYCDC’s bond debt and acquiring the hotel. At current rates, the city’s debt would be about the same as it is currently paying as guarantor of the LYCDC bonds.

A new body could be created, with members from the state, perhaps the county, the business community and such to oversee the operation AND sale of the hotel.

Robert Lowe sketched it out this way in a post on Facebook last night:

 

The Trenton Hotel 7 Step

1. The City issues taxable bonds equal to the hotel equity it has guaranteed, approximately $13.5 mil, and retires the LYCDC bonds it has guaranteed in equal amount. With this action, the City officially owns the hotel, disbands the LYCDC and nullifies the Asset Manager contract.
2. The City works with the Management firm to operate as an unbranded hotel.
3. The City plans what is truly needed in a reservation system, and works with outlets such as Expedia, Flipkey, and the like to ensure continued internet marketing.
4. The City begins negotiations with the unsecured creditors to arrange for forgiveness of such debt.
5. The City studies the advisability of sale timing, and the possible returns potentially realized by initiating renovations - a true professional business assessment with realistic projections for each available scenario.
6. The City prepares an RFP for sale, and determines the timing of sale, based upon a thorough assessment of the business analysis described above.
7. The City sells the hotel, and encourages all stakeholders to step up to bat, requesting a demonstration of their support by steering business to the hotel. This includes the State, who by purchasing procedures and policy can drive volume.

We think Mr. Lowe is onto something.

We know we will likely never get back the money already invested in this project. We need to focus on getting the hotel into private hands.

As Mr. Lowe said, details need to be worked out. Still, this is more of a plan than we have seen or heard to date.  

It is worth a shot.

Something is happening here but you don't know what it is...

...Do you, Mr. Mack.

The saga of the Tony Mack administration gets sadder.

While he awaits his day in Federal court on charges of conspiring to accept bribes in a make believe development deal, the indicted and embattled mayor continues to lose whatever shreds of credibility he may have had left.

In April, the Civil Service Commission ruled that the administration had wrongfully laid off former lead park ranger Michael Morris in favor of Mack croney, Robert "Chico" Mendez. The CSC gave the city a month to rehire Morris and dismiss Mendez. The city has done neither.

In fact, the administration is claiming that it wants to appeal the decision in the case. Strange, since the record shows that they did not even bother to respond to the matter when it was crawling through the CSC process.

Asking the city council to approve funding for an appeal that would seem to have no real standing but instead is based purely on the mayor's personal vendetta against a former employee is not going to be an easy sell. The governing body is increasingly wary of these kinds of wasteful and ultimately fruitless expenditures.

And, lest anyone think the council does not have a say in the matter, let us refer you to this little item from the city code:

 

 

§ 2-25 Special counsel.

 

Whenever (s)he deems the interests of the City so require the City Attorney may, with the approval of the Mayor and Council and within the limits of available appropriations, appoint special counsel to assist him/her in the preparation, trial or argument of such legal matters or proceedings as (s)he may determine. If the City Attorney should be disqualified with respect to any matter, the Mayor shall appoint special counsel, with the approval of the City Council, to represent the City for and with respect to such matter.

 

 Clearly, the governing body has the approval. Period.

 

This might be a mere annoyance to a mayor who has repeatedly ignored the laws if they didn't agree with his personal agenda, but it is only the beginning.

“We received notification from DCA earlier today that they will not even consider any funding in support of the hotel until they receive a copy of a plan from the city with respect to available options for funding and profits — a more comprehensive plan,” business administrator Sam Hutchinson said.

After an hour long presentation meant to coax the city council into approving a $200,000 expenditure to help cover the costs of transitioning the hotel from Marriot to Wyndham and changing management companies, members of the governing body engaged in a little question and answer session about the hotel.

 

All of the responses from LYCDC president Joyce Kersey, the LYCDC attorney and representatiaves from the management companies circled around having more money appropriated to effect the changes and better position the property in the market place. Very little was said about efforts to sell the hotel beyond vague references to giving consideration to any "serious offer".

In response to a question from council president Phyllis Holly-Ward, city business administrator Sam Hutchinson announced that he had just that morning received communication from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs informing him that they could not proceed without a concrete plan in place.

Seizing the moment to solidify the obvious (and reported) inclination of a majority of the body to cut off further spending on the hotel, Councilman Zac Chester immediately asked if the administration would pull the item from the docket.  Strangely, Hutchinson declined to defer to the mayor's higher authority and declined to withdraw the funding resolution from the docket.

It really didn't matter as the council has the authority to set its agenda and can add or remove items as it sees fit.

This didn't stop Councilwoman McBride from launching into an angy attack on the DCA, proclaiming that Director Neff was, in effect, the "mayor of Trenton" and that Mayor Mack had been reduced to nothing more than a mere figurehead.

The councilwoman was more correct than she knows.

The latest MOU signed with the state continued a three year trend of putting more control over city matters in the DCA's hands and creating less leeway for the mayor and his few remaining cronies to wreck their own particular brand of municipal mayhem.

The edict to not proceed with any further funding for the hotel without a concrete plan represents a very significant flexing of the state's muscles. It appears that the state "is not playing" anymore.

Something IS happening here.

 

Disappointed

Trenton City Council held a special meeting Tuesday night. The purpose of the meeting was to present publicly the legal process for filling any vacant elected offices (council or mayor).

The meeting was relatively brief, under an hour. The information was presented, council was provided an opportunity to raise any questions (they had none) and then members of the audience were invited to ask questions.

Despite reports last week of errors in the way the city legal department described the process to council in advance of the meeting, the information provided tonight was correct.

In short:

• If a vacancy occurs in a council position, the remainder of the governing body appoints a replacement by a majority vote. 
• If a vacancy occurs in the office of mayor, the council president becomes the acting mayor until the body appoints a replacement.
• In either case, if the vacancy occurs prior to September 1 of the final year of the term, a special election is scheduled for the next general or municipal election, whichever comes first.
• If a vacancy occurs after September 1, the appointee completes the term; no special election is required.

There were some good questions raised by members of the public tonight.

 

Q: Who can be appointed? A: Anyone who is legally qualified to hold the seat. Not just a member of council or the administration.

Q. What constitutes a majority vote on an appointment? A. Four votes out of the seven possible (in the case of a tie in voting for a replacement council member, the mayor may vote).

A little trickier question was about whether there would be an open process of soliciting names and resumes of those interested in filling any future vacancies and just how that process might be handled.

The council president promised as open and transparent a process as the law allows and an open call for submissions from interested parties. The law director rightfully pointed out that criteria for evaluating the submissions would need to be agreed upon by the governing body and made known to the public.

All well and good. Moreover, the proceedings went better, largely, than one might have expected after reading of the earlier confusion over the actual process.

What was unsettling, though, were questions raised about whether or not members of city council had been approached about securing their votes for one particular individual or another to be appointed mayor in case of a vacancy.

The reason for the line of questioning was a obvious belief that some sort of back room deal had already been made on just who council would appoint to fill a vacancy in the office of mayor.

The political climate in Trenton has long fostered an abundance of conspiracy theories. One could suppose it is a natural by-product of politics.

However, if this is the tone the upcoming campaign is going to take than we have a big problem.

Trenton is in crisis. We need competent, steady leadership. We do not need another thin-skinned, suspicious, administration. We need to build coalitions and to include all segments of the population. We can no longer afford to discount or disparage others simply because they are rivals or challengers.

It is a given that candidates cannot absolutely control what their supporters say and do, but they can make an effort or distance themselves from those who won’t behave civilly.

There is no room for the accusatory challenges launched from the podium tonight. Nor is there cause for the commentary passed between various members of the audience. That kind of behavior is not going to save Trenton. It is only going to send us further along the road to dysfunction and divisiveness.

If you are going to campaign through innuendo and rumor, you are not going to win a lot of votes. And you are not going to help Trenton.

It would benefit us all if candidates and their supporters would keep their conspiracy theories to themselves unless and until they have very credible evidence to back up their assertions. Failing to do so will not only hurt their chances of obtaining the goal they seek, it will severely inhibit the city’s ability to move out of these troubled times and onto recovery.

Isn't the whole idea for us to be better, do better than our recent history indicates we are?

The people have spoken

Walking the dogs Saturday afternoon, we headed up Front Street. As we approached the Old Barracks, the strains of fife and drums could be heard. The closer we got, the louder the music.

It was very easy to imagine walking that very street some 237 years ago and hearing the same music emanating from the parade ground in front of the Barracks. It was hard to suppress a smile.

Coming around to the back side of the Barracks we came upon the landscaping crew laying the sod around the almost completed "Petty's Run" historic site.

This site, if you don't remember was the focus of controversy late in 2010. Excavations at the site uncovered the remains of a pre-revolutionary steel mill as well as the city's first cotton mill dating from the early 19th century. The steel mill is the only one from colonial America to have been located and uncovered.

Under Governor Corzine, the site was to be featured as part of the Capital State Park. When the Christie administration came in, plans were frozen due to the state's fiscal crisis. Lt. Governor Guadagno determined the excavation should be filled in. Preservationists and history buffs were up in arms.

Finally, with a promise of financial support from Mercer County, the state cancelled the plan to completely fill in and cover over the site. Instead, the site would be fenced, landscaped and interpretive signage installed to explain and celebrate the significance of that location.

The work is nearly complete. The ribbon cutting for the site is tentatively scheduled for late in May.

As the strains from the Barracks Fifes and Drums Corps echoed across the capital grounds, it caused us to pause and reflect on the history and significance of that corner of the city. 

The Barracks stand as a testament to the will of people or that of the government. They were built to house troops during the French and Indian War, rather than to have the soldiers billet in the houses of townspeople.

The building is also a symbol of Trenton's significance in our War for Independence from Great Britain.

Today, the preserved and interpreted presences of the Petty's Run site is there to remind us of our industrial past.  The fact that the site will be available to the public to view is due to the force of the voices that spoke up for its preservation. It was a bloodless fight of the people to overcome the single-mindedness (dare we say, "tyranny"?) of the state house.

The principles fought for in the 1776 were achieved and honored in 2011. The people spoke. Government responded. Appropriately.

The fifes and drums played. We smiled.

It's really not that hard

The phrase “you can’t make this stuff up” has, along with its more scatological sibling, been uttered a lot these past 33 months or so. A whole lot. Daily, even.

So none of us should really be surprised to learn of new feats of absurdity accomplished by what is sometimes referred to as the municipal government of the city of Trenton.

Today’s example is another great idea gone wrong at the hands of an administration clearly not up to the task of guiding, let alone governing, this city.

A recap: our current mayor is under Federal indictment and awaiting trial on corruption charges. The trial is expected to be held this coming summer. If found guilty, at sentencing he loses his seat as the mayor, creating a vacancy in the office.

Ever since the mayor was arrested last September, and maybe even after the FBI raided his home and city hall on successive days in July of 2012, people have inquired about what happens “if and when?”

To the credit of Council President Phyllis Holly-Ward and the rest of the governing body, they determined it would be a good idea to hold a special council meeting to review, in public, the process of filling a vacancy in any of the elected offices in Trenton's city government. That meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 30 at 5:30 pm in Council Chambers at City Hall. This morning, Erin Duffy had an article in the Times about this meeting. A careful read of the piece indicates a problem. And not a small one.

Down towards the end of the piece, Duffy writes:

“Holly-Ward said the interpretation given to her by the city’s law department was that if the mayor stepped down permanently, the business administrator would serve as mayor for up to 60 days and then council would choose a new interim mayor.”

The text we underlined is key here. If this is truly what Holly-Ward was told, someone is mistaken.

If you look at the city code, you will find that Chapter 2-4 refers to the Mayor. Under that chapter, in articles E. and F. there are provisions for what happens when the mayor is not able to attend to the duties and responsibilities of the office on a temporary basis (E.) and when the position is deemed vacant (F.).

From the City of Trenton Code

2-4 Mayor.
E. Acting Mayor. As provided by the Charter (Section 3-12, N.J.S.A. 40:69A-42), the Mayor shall designate the Chief of Staff, the Business Administrator, any other department head or the City Clerk to act as Mayor whenever the Mayor shall be prevented, by absence from the City, disability or other cause, from attending to the duties of the office. During such time, the person so designated by the Mayor shall possess all the rights, powers and duties of Mayor. Whenever the Mayor shall have been unable to attend to the duties of the office for a period of 60 consecutive days for any of the above-stated reasons, an acting Mayor shall be appointed by the Council who shall succeed to all the rights, powers and duties of the Mayor or the then Acting Mayor.

F. Vacancy. A vacancy in the office of Mayor shall be filled by election for the remainder of the unexpired term at the next regular municipal election occurring not less than 60 days after the occurrence of the vacancy. Council shall fill vacancies temporarily by appointment to serve until the qualification of a person so elected.

In the first instance, the mayor is able to designate an acting mayor to serve for up to 60 days in place of the elected official. This could be the Business Administrator, a Chief of Staff (if we had one), the City Clerk or any Department Director.

Situations where this might occur would be, for example, if the mayor were traveling out of state (as was the case last summer when Mayor Mack went on vacation and designated Business Administrator Sam Hutchinson as Acting Mayor. It could apply in times of illness or other medical leave, etc.

The point being, the absence is temporary.

The second section deals with the circumstances of the office being vacated by death, resignation, or some other reason that the official can not serve out the remainder of the term. This would be, in a phrase, a “permanent absence” as would be the case should the current Mayor be removed from office as a result of the pending legal case.

You will note that in section F. there is no mention of the BA stepping in for any length of time. This raises the question: “Then who becomes Mayor?”

For the answer, we must turn to state law. There are two unlinked provisions of law that deal with the matter and they are pretty clear. One is found in N.J.S.A. 40A:9 which is a string of sections of law dealing with the organization of local government. The other is in N.J.S.A. 40A:16 which focuses on the succession of office in a uniform way.

The general law:

§ 40A:9-131. Acting mayor (applicable to all communities)

In every municipality, unless otherwise provided by law, if a vacancy occurs in the office of mayor, by reason of death, resignation or otherwise, the presiding officer of the governing body shall become the acting mayor until a successor is elected and qualified.

The municipal vacancy law:

§ 40A:16-12 (Applicable to Trenton’s Non-Partisan form of Government)

Appointment to fill vacancy where incumbent was not nominee of a political party; time to fill vacancy

If the incumbent whose office has become vacant was not elected to office as the nominee of a political party, the governing body may, within 30 days of the occurrence of the vacancy, appoint a successor to fill the vacancy without regard to party.

Again, there is no mention of the ascension of the BA or anyone other than the presiding officer of the governing body to be acting mayor until a successor is named.

Further, there is a court case which determined that both of those laws are not only compatible but should be read and applied together.

DeSoto v. Smith, 383 N.J. Super. 384, 891 A.2d 1241, 2006 N.J. Super. LEXIS 54 (App. Div. 2006)

As the result of applying Section 40A:9-131, a municipal attorney was terminated by the Council President who became acting mayor and council president temporarily pursuant to N.J. Stat. Ann. § 40A:9-131. In an effort to defeat the acting mayor’s dismissal, it was argued that section 131, which allowed the council president to serve as both acting mayor and council president, violated the “separation of powers” doctrine. However the Court ruled that the doctrine of separation of powers was not generally applicable to a Faulkner Act mayor-council government, because the design of the Faulkner Act provided for checks and balances which would enable the Council by a 2/3 majority vote to nullify the acting mayor’s dismissal under N.J. Stat. Ann. § 40:69A-43(c).

The bottom line is that the succession in office law (40A:16-12) provides 30 days within which the council is to select an acting mayor pending the holding of an election (or for the unexpired balance of the term of the former mayor, depending on the time of the vacancy). Pending that, the Council President becomes acting Mayor as well as Council President.

This contradicts the interpretation that Council President Holly-Ward says she was given by the city law department.
Want further evidence?

We need only look a few miles east of Trenton’s City Hall to the Municipal Building for Hamilton Township. When then Mayor John Bencivengo resigned in the wake of the guilty verdict last November, who immediately became Acting Mayor?

Kevin Meara was the presiding officer of the governing body (township council) and thus became the Acting Mayor until the selection of Kelly Yaede to hold the title until the special election in November 2013.

Why Trenton’s law department has come up with this idea that the BA becomes the temporary Mayor is beyond us.

Hopefully, the state of NJ through the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Local Government Services will complete their "review" of the matter and advise all parties as to what is the correct information. Otherwise, we will end up with another empty but well-intended gesture of trying to do the right thing.

Enough already

This situation about Paul Harris, the vehicle accident, whether or not he had permission to drive a city vehicle, etc. has gone on too long.

It seems pretty clear that a city vehicle had been repaired at the request and with the knowledge of the BA's office...specifically his assistant, John Seigle.

While it is quite plausible that Mr. Harris used the vehicle without formal, written permission, it does not seem likely that he did so without anyone's knowledge and assumed approval. The set up of the offices in which the vehicle keys are kept (in a lockbox) is such that it would be hard to obtain them during the work day without someone taking notice.

The amount of misinformation, misdirection and miss-appropriation of city resources, while par for THIS administration, is way beyond what is acceptable.

Both of the local dailies have reported on this. The Trentonian, the Times (twice) and Trentonian columnist L. A. Parker has commented on the matter.

It certainly appears that, as Mr. Parker puts it, Mr. Harris was made the scapegoat in an episode that points up several failings of Trenton City Government:

1. The city has way too many vehicles than are needed.
2. There are minimal policies and procedures governing who uses these vehicles, when and for what reasons.
3. There is lax adherence to the policies that do exist.
4. There is no adherence to the 2010 ordinance that was meant to rein in the abuses and costs of maintaining the fleet of passenger vehicles.
5. The city has failed to provide accurate information in this matter: either the inventory dated June 30, 2012 is incorrect or the statements that BA Sam Hutchinson did not like the "Crown Vic" he had been assigned is flat out wrong. This document says he was assigned a Chevy Caprice.
6. The vehicle in the police report, has a license plate number matching one that was "unassigned" at the time of the June inventory. Just like the Saturn that Mr. Harris had been driving around in for a few months and that it is claimed Mr. Hutchinson desired over the "Crown Vic (Chevy Caprice?)". The Ford Escape was, in effect, a "pool car" available to anyone needing a city vehicle to do city business (such as dropping off another employee to pick up a recently repaired auto).

Kevin Moriarty discusses this kind of "casual corruption" thoroughly in his blog post from the other day.

We suggest that the Administration rescind its disciplinary action against Mr. Harris, immediately (or whatever the proper action is according to the Civil Service rules.)

We also suggest that the Administration make immediate plans to reduce the current passenger vehicle fleet and adopt a straight up reimbursement policy/procedure for business use of a personal vehicle.

Civil Service Commission orders Mendez gone!

In an order issued on Wednesday, April 3, 2013, the NJ Civil Service Commission determined that the layoff of former head of the Trenton Park Rangers, Michael Morris, was faulty and ordered him reinstated.

Robert "Chico" Mendez who had been hired as a "seasonal" employee when Mayor Mack took office was ordered to be removed from his position.

Mendez, a long-time supporter of the mayor, had been put in charge of the Park Ranger staff even before the September, 2011 layoff that initially removed Morris from the city payroll.

This decision follows a similar one last September that called for the removal of Mack hires, Dave Briegle, Charles Hall and Henry Page from their posts as "Water Meter Readers" with the Trenton Water Works.

Hall, who worked in the city Recreation, Natural Resources and Culture department while being paid as a TWW employee has since plead guilty to charges in both the Tony Mack corruption case and the Jo Jo Giorgianni drug distribution case.

Manure

Trenton Mayor Tony Mack gave his "state of the city" address before city council Monday evening.

The text of the speech can be found on the city website, here.

Don't go there if you are looking for any revelations, significant accomplishments or measurable goals for the coming year.

Mayor Mack started off, as is his "tradition" reminding the audience that his administration managed to balance the budget even with the $55 million deficit his first year in office, $34 million last year and $26 million this year. He then criticized those who point out that balancing the budget is the law and his administration should claim no extra credit for merely doing its job.

In his view, there will always be a higher demand for services than the city's revenues will pay for. We suppose that means he still feels it is necessary to run sports leagues and put on festivals and parades even when there is no money for such unnecessary activities.

The next item was a brag about how much money in grants and aid has been awarded the city during his tenure. This is another indication of just how out of touch with reality he is.

Taking pride in surviving off of handouts is just wrong. A real leader (heed this all of you mayoral wannabes) would be seeking ways to raise revenues and LESSEN the dependence on grants and government largesse.

A responsible mayor would be working very hard to move the city towards a firmer fiscal footing with a long term goal of become something close to self-sustainable. (Another fault of too many of those desiring to hold public office, they don't look past the next election cycle).

Keeping to the grants theme, the mayor gave props to those individuals in the city who write the grant applications that successfully bring in the money.  Of course, he has no problem wasting money not using grant software the city subscribes to. How much more in grants might we bring in if we used this? We are paying for it regardless.

The mayor wraps up his fiscal responsibility pitch by claiming that the reason we have received so much financial assistance is because he has righted the budgetary ship. He then launches into the oft repeated sources of revenue he is ready to tap into...delinquent tax liens, unpaid municipal court fines and costs, and squeezing the last drops of money leftover from completed projects in the hope of applying them elsewhere.

This notion, again, demonstrates Mack's total lack of a grasp of the situation. Even if, and it is a big IF, the city were 100% successful in collecting the unpaid tax liens and the court revenues, it is a one shot deal. These are not revenue streams. They are little caches of money we may be able to tap into. Once. It is just another stop gap measure; one of those "one-shot gimmicks" that the mayor later decries.

Predictably, he touted the deal with Thomas Edison State College for the Glen Cairn Arms site. He conveniently forgot to mention that in last year's speech he listed, on page 13, under "accomplishments" that "the old Glen Cairn Arms site will finally be demolished, and a developer will be sought to create a more marketable and valuable site." {our emphasis}

First, if it is an "accomplishment" it has, by definition been done. So if it "will finally be demolished" (future tense) in could not have been accomplished (past tense). And, indeed, it wasn't accomplished. And it still isn't.

The city council approved the sale of the property and the city has signed a disposition agreement about what "will" happen. The fact remains, one year later, the site is exactly the same as it was when he gave last year's speech.

This year's speech is full of those kinds of statements inconsistent with his prior state of the city addresses. No reference to last year's "Comprehensive Crime Initiative" (that never was comprehensive or even an initiative). No commentary about the cops walking the beat.

He did state that the Trenton Police Department reopened the East and West district stations to "increase response time" and that is the way the script reads. Obviously he is as careless as he is delusional.

We could go through each paragraph of this less than 30 minute speech and point out all the things that are wrong. You don't deserve that pain.

We don't deserve this mayor.

The state of the city is quite simply worse than it was last year or the year before. Tony F. Mack's tenure as mayor has been nothing short of a disaster.

Let us hope his failures are noticed by those who seek to replace him and they do everything they can to not repeat them.

Past due

UPDATE:  Cleve Christie, LYCDC Board Chair has resigned.  Read his letter here.

The saga of Trenton’s lone hotel continues to get more sordid by the day.

This morning’s Trentonian has an article by David Foster revealing that Cleve Christie, chairman of the Lafayette Yard Community Development Corporation, has been promoting “jazz events” at the hotel.

One of these events, part of last autumn’s Bring Back Trenton series of musical events, was booked into the Trenton War Memorial. That rental showed up as an outstanding payable from the hotel in the amount of $1,698 owed to Patriots Theater.

This item came up at Tuesday night’s city council meeting when West Ward representative Zac Chester questioned the expense. It was explained that the hotel had “overbooked” its banquet/meeting rooms and had to bump an event to the venue next door, the War Memorial (Patriots Theater). We were made to understand that this is standard practice when hotels “overbook” rooms.

We can see this happening with guest rooms if there is an unexpected rush, fewer than expected cancellations, and guests unexpectedly extending their stay (we should be so lucky!).

Just how does it happen with banquet rooms when deposits are usually paid and contracts signed for a date and time for an event?

The answer appears in the revelation that the LYCDC board chair has been running a series of events at the hotel. In the article, Christie claims that he was approached by the hotel’s former general manager (presumably Jeff Zieger but we do not know for sure) to host concerts to “generate foot traffic and revenue for the hotel.”

Ok, first, this is a hotel. It is in the business of renting out rooms to overnight guests. Yes, it also hosts functions in its various meeting rooms but the primary business is to rent guest rooms. Building “foot traffic” does not generate room nights.
Second, the article explains that Christie didn’t have to put down a deposit to hold rooms for his events. This is contrary to the way the general public does business with the hotel. This is, therefore, special treatment, a benefit, afforded Christie that is not afforded others.

It is generally considered a conflict of interest if a board member personally benefits from business dealings with the entity whose board they sit on. It really doesn’t matter that the concerts only broke even or that they cost him some money out of pocket. Nor does it matter that the intent was to “generate foot traffic and revenue for the hotel.” Mr. Christie should not have been directly involved in the enterprise.

Still, Christie denies there was a conflict of interest.

Councilman Zac Chester said it best:

“The bottom line he did get a benefit as being board chair.”

What remains to be learned is if, as Christie claims, he or his group paid the hotel for the room rental. If so, then why didn’t the payment get made to Patriots Theater?

Was this a case similar to the $170,000 in parking fees collected from the adjacent garage but not passed along to the Trenton Parking Authority? Is the hotel so cash poor that they are playing shell games with the money streams just trying to keep their creditors at bay? That was surely the impression we were left with from the presentation given by Waterford (the current hotel management company) on Tuesday night.

Or is this a case of another “perc” that Mr. Christie felt entitled to as chairman of the LYCDC board?

Where was the rest of the board in all this? Were they aware, did they condone it?

What about the board’s legal counsel, Rocky Peterson? Was he asked to give an opinion on whether Mr. Christie’s activities might be a conflict of interest? Did he offer such an opinion or was he left in the dark about all of this?

What else has been going on at the hotel that we, the taxpaying public who are on the hook for $1.4 million in debt service every year for the next two decades, should know about?

From where we sit it is apparent that the current LYCDC board should be dismissed.  Letters of interest and resumes from those wishing to serve on a newly constituted board should be solicited…including those from any current members.  A new board should be put in place immediately with members vetted and approved by the city council as well as the administration.
And the matter of Mr. Christie’s apparent conflict of interest should be thoroughly investigated by the appropriate law enforcement agency.

Post script #1: It has also come to light that the currentbylaws of the LYCDC call for all appointments to be with the advice and consent of the city council. This clause has not been carried out in recent memory, if ever. This would then imply that the current board sits in violation of its own rules.

Post script #2: We don’t even know where to begin to address Mr. Christie’s quote that closes the Trentonian article. Christie implies that he is being persecuted because of his allegiance to our indicted mayor (who appointed Mr. Christie to the LYCDC). Kevin Moriarty does a fine job ofhandling that matter in his blog post.

A look back

The failure of Trenton's sole hotel has been a hot topic of late. The comments of former mayor Doug Palmer in this morning's Trentonian ratcheted up the heat just a bit. The wind blew hard from across the Delaware River in Yardley, PA as Palmer tried to paint a completely delusional picture of the hotel's value to the city.

Kevin Moriarty has a very good analysis of those comments in his blog post.

As students of history, we wanted to offer up some perspective on the hotel deal. Courtesy of the online, paid, archives of the Times, we have pulled up just a few articles from the mid-1990's to help refresh your memories. 

Let's start with an article written by Joseph Dee and published on October 31, 1995.  The article reports on a press conference held the day before announcing plans for an arena, hotel, conference center project on the Roebling/US Wire Rope site.

"The plan includes an arena that would be the home of a professional minor league hockey club, a hotel and conference center, a movie theater complex and some office and retail space." Dee wrote.

Describing the hotel and conference center, Dee reported the following:
"The hotel is slated to have 225 rooms while the conference center could handle groups of up to 800, Berman said. The hotel, estimated to cost $25 million, will be ''significantly nicer than a Budget Inn,'' Berman said when that company's lodging was mentioned for comparison purposes."
There was, of course, a caveat:
"Berman said the hotel would not be built if the arena is not. 'The arena is a feeder for the hotel and conference center. Visiting teams will feed the hotel. These two (components of the project) naturally fit and feed each other,' Berman said."

Even then, Palmer wasn't as gracious or grateful as he should have been:
"Mayor Palmer, who thanked Berman and his partners 'for this very bold and great move,' said he would prefer that a hotel and conference center be built closer to the downtown district. Regardless of the location, 'it's an idea whose time has come.'' Palmer said the project ''means jobs, business and other opportunities.' "

In a follow up story from December 20 of that same year, we learn that then state Senator Dick LaRossa was aiding and abetting Palmer's plan to build the hotel downtown. The story started off this way:

TRENTON _ Sen. Dick LaRossa, R-Ewing, threw a bucket of cold water on the proposal for a new sports arena in Trenton, saying the state will not fund it.
 His comments further roiled the waters surrounding proposals for a hotel- conference center and an arena in the capital city.  At this point, Berman had already changed the original plan.  Instead of building all three facilities, Dee reported that Berman "and other private investors would build the hotel and conference center only if the state pays for the proposed 10,000-seat arena, which he estimated would cost between $30 million and $40 million."  LaRossa, who sat on the budget committee, was insistent that the state would not finance the arena because it would not provide any returns to the stae.
LaRossa and Palmer favored the Lafayette Yard site for the hotel. Berman said he and his investors would not build a hotel on the Lafayette Street parking lot site, saying he believes it would fail there.

In the article, LaRossa argues his position this way:
''The state spends $900,000 a year on a conference center in Plainsboro _ that's money that could be rerouted to the city to finance a conference center. The state is only going to participate in a project that they'll get something out of, that will address a need. I am not about to support anything which is going to undermine the development of the Lafayette site.''

Palmer said:
''We've been working on the hotel and conference center for three years now,'' Palmer said. ''I respect what Ron Berman's trying to do, and he has been great, but this arena came out of the blue. Hopefully we can work with the state on an arena at the appropriate time.''

PALMER AGREED with LaRossa that the state would more likely help pay for a conference center. ''If the state supports the conference center, it would be getting something back. If it built an arena, it would be giving money away,'' the mayor said.

Then Mercer County Executive Bob Prunetti weighed in:
''My position is simple. I think the first priority has to be an arena. That will draw people to Trenton. Then we can let the private sector decide if and where a hotel should be built.''

On November 3, 1995, the Times published an editorial entitled Right mix, right place.

Included in the overall support for the Berman proposal was the following caution:

But remember: The project won't be the salvation of New Jersey's capital city. Yes, it will create hundreds of jobs, but it won't erase the poverty, stop the crime or change the school system. The city must develop solid programs in education, medical care, housing and economic development to deal with these problems.

And it should do so soon. Efforts should be made to ensure that local citizens get more than just a few part-time jobs selling hot dogs and programs and directing parking-lot traffic. There could be many opportunities for minority entrepreneurs to strengthen their role in the free-enterprise system.

Obvioiusly, the arena got built, but with county money. The hotel conference center got built, but by the city on the Lafayette Yard site.

There was one more twist in the tale. A developer from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania by the name of John Vartan had been in the mix off and on since 1994. Doug Palmer was courting Vartan to build the hotel downtown.

The Times' then business editor, David Newhouse wrote a piece that was published on April 9, 1996.

In the article, Palmer recognizes that the project will need "ongoing state support" while "other officials called it a serious mistake to interest any developer based on such requirements."

The article reports on a study done by state agencies that "envisioned a 165-room hotel with 17,500 square feet of meeting space and a multistory parking lot. It labeled the hotel at Lafayette Yard financially viable if it receives between 62 and 66 percent private financing."

Well, that private financing never happened, did it?

Here we are, 17 years later, and the "hotel at Lafayette Yard" is most decidedly not financially viable to us, the taxpayers.

We leave you with the following letter to the editor published in the Times of Trenton, January 4, 1997.

Mayor should support project

How is it that Mayor Palmer can so easily escape valid editorial criticism for not publicly supporting the efforts of private developer Ron Berman to build an arena and hotel-conference center at the Roebling Complex site?
I mention this after having read the interview of the mayor's 1997 forecast for the city of Trenton by Don Delany in the December 1996 issue of Mercer Business magazine.
Not once in the entire interview does Palmer mention the prospect of a major sports arena being built in Trenton. This obvious omission by the mayor clearly exposes his devious plan to promote his visionless hotel agenda, no matter what the loss in tax ratables and the cost added on to the taxpayers' bill. It is mind-boggling that this mayor is deliberately sacrificing this tax- ratable asset (not only for the city, but for the entire county) simply in order to satisfy his own ego.

Instead of genuinely supporting the sure-shot money-making and job-providing potential of a sports arena (and hotel conference center) at the Roebling Complex site, Palmer has chosen to be silent.

Of course, the reason for Palmer's silence is directly related to his competitive stance with Berman for state funding. Quite simply, he wants the money for his lame, long-shot fiasco; whereas, Berman needs the state of New Jersey's money for his sure shot _ a revenue-producing arena.

I hope the powers that be in both the state and county governments will wisely provide financing for the project or projects that will generate the greatest financial return.

Indeed, the mayor should support and promote projects that will most benefit the greatest number of his constituents instead of undermining the projects that will help Trenton financially.

This mayor owes his constituents an explanation as to why he is not genuinely supporting Berman's arena, hotel and conference center.

However, what is even more discouraging is that the media will probably avoid bringing this politically relevant'' question to light.

Joseph A. DeVito
Trenton

OOPS! They did it again!

The indicted mayor of Trenton takes great pride in the creation of his "Mayor's Learning Centers." So much pride, he outfitted each of the former library branch buildings with 50", flat screen TV's.

Why the so-called "Learning Centers" require large screen TV's is beyond us. They are barely open. When they are open, they are staffed by untrained, possibly un-vetted, volunteers.

We can only figure it is another example of the IO's penchant for appearance over substance. The bells and whistles are what counts, not their appropriateness, functionality or suitability.

During Hurricane Sandy, someone broke into the East Trenton Learning Center at 701 N. Clinton Ave. and liberated the two large screen TV's that had been installed there. There was no alarm...presumably due to the wide spread power outages caused by the storm.

Of course, no serial numbers were on file for the stolen items so further investigation would go nowhere, even IF we had the manpower on our severely depleted police force to conduct one.

In most instances, crime victims will try to gain some insight from the unpleasant experience and take steps to make themselves less likely to become targets again. They may increase security around their premises. They may do a better job of keeping records of their possessions.

Apparently, that is not the way things work here in Trenton.

The Mayor's Learning Center on Greenwood Avenue recently had its large, flat screen TV stolen.

According to the police report, a Ms. Tanisha Dyton was "doing a walk through at 1115 Greenwood Ave" on Thursday, January 10, when she noticed the TV was missing. The police report mentions that there was no sign of forced entry.

Granted, the report was taken over the phone by a police aide so no onsite investigation was carried out by a trained officer but forced entry would be fairly obvious to anyone discovering the crime.

The report also notes that the TV serial number is unknown.

The report does not state is whether or not the building is alarmed and, if so, did the alarm go off.

We have to wonder why, after the theft of the TV's from the East Trenton Learning Center, building alarms were not checked to make sure they were operable. We also wonder why the serial numbers of the remaining TV's were not recorded and kept somewhere, just in case of another theft. Moreover, after the previous incident, were the remaining TV’s secured with cable locks or other devices to help prevent their easy removal?

Apparently, the Mayor's Learning Centers are not teaching us anything useful.

Take a longer view

On January 11, the city administration announced it was ready to make a deal with Thomas Edison State College for the Glen Cairn Arms site.

That announcement took many by surprise.

The swiftness with which the proposal was dropped on the public and the city council, which must approve the deal, raised eyebrows. Specifically, the proposed one time fee of $300,000 in lieu of any property taxes going forward has generated some pretty stiff resistance.

There has been lots of discussion, most of it online, over the merits of this proposal. Some of it has been enlightening; some has been sarcastic and/or snarky.

Some of us feel that the TESC proposal may not be the highest and best use of the parcel at 301 West State Street. It would be more palatable if there were some sort of structured annual payment in lieu of property taxes built into the package. This just seems to be common sense in a city that is drowning in a sea of tax-exempt properties.

Those who favor the proposal as is, say we should not let the minimal, one-time payment stand in the way of what will be a highly visible project.

"Get something done," is their mantra, "and other development projects will follow."

The implication is that by treating the TESC project as a "loss leader" it will drive other developers to the city looking to do deals.  The supporters of the project also tout the secondary benefits of spin off jobs and revenues for existing local businesses.

It is an old argument. It has been tried. It has not been successful.

Getting into the game

We can readily point to the Baseball Park and Arena as examples of big-ticket projects that involved public money and have yet to generate any significant economic development.

Yes, people attend events at both venues. However, the self-contained nature of both facilities makes it unnecessary and unusual for patrons to visit other businesses before or after attending games and concerts. People may come into Trenton to participate in these events, but they do not, as a rule, spend money at other businesses in the city.

This is not just the reality here, studies from around the nation have shown little proof that these public facilities stimulate the local economy. Ken Belson wrote about this in an article published in the New York Times on September 7, 2010.

James Joyner wrote about the faux benefits of publicly financed private sports stadiums in his "Outside the Beltway" blog last May.

The Taxpayers League of Minnesota sums up the fallacy in eight points in this document.

There may be some jobs created that are filled by Trenton residents but most are part-time and or seasonal.

Similarly, those that provide supplies and services to either facility are not necessarily or predominately Trenton-based.

It is a pretty safe bet that no one moved to the city because of the ballpark or arena. Government funded sports venues simply do not spur economic development.

Checking in

The city owned Marriott Hotel on Lafayette Street is another example. We were "assured" by the Palmer administration that a top-notch hotel located just steps from the seat of state government would be just the thing to spark an explosion of economic opportunity downtown.

The hotel has yet to turn a profit. Not only is the city (read: taxpayers) on the hook for the bond debt used to finance the construction of the building, it is also required to make up any operational deficits.

Last year, we footed the bill for a $500,000 cash infusion to keep the doors open and lights on. This year, we may very likely be asked for another round of funding to cover operating expenses.

Many of us told then Mayor Palmer this would happen when he proposed it, but he did not want to hear it. He forced his way on the city and we are paying the price, litereally, for his arrogance.

One way out of this is to just sell the hotel outright. For whatever price. It would, at the very least, free up the taxpayers from having to fund anymore operating deficits and put the property on the tax rolls. Even with likely abatements, the city might actually see some revenue from the property at last.

If a private owner cannot make the hotel work, that would be sad, but at least the city will only be dealing with the "fixed" cost of the bond debt (principal and interest). The city (and state) put out the money to build this and there have been no real returns on that investment. It certainly has not generated any real development downtown or increased ratables in the city.

Around the corner and up the block

To go along with the construction and opening of the hotel, the city looked for ways to jump start development in the immediate vicinity. As early as 2000, with the planning for the hotel under way, the city looked around and decided they needed to purchase the long vacant "Caola property" at S. Warren and W. Front streets. The city paid $162,863.69 for the property and began to market it. (Bear in mind, at the same time the city had taken possession of the Glen Cairn Arms four years earlier but was by then embroiled in a dispute over the final value of the property).

In 2002, not quite a year after the city settled on the Caola property, they had a well known and respected developer, Enterprise Real Estate Services, interested in doing a project there. Enterprise, an arm of the highly successful Rouse Company, planned to spend $4,000,000 on the project. Despite the fact that Enterprise was not looking for any tax breaks for the project, the deal never went through.

At the time, there were murmurings that Enterprise requested the city kick in some money to help with the asbestos and lead paint situations on the site, as well as partial demolition. The city said "No." Enterprise walked.

Then along came former Senator Robert Torricelli and his Woodrose Properties. They made a proposal to the city and were designated the developer. Woodrose got the property for $1 and a tax abatement. The city did the demo work, removed the asbestos and stabilized the building. Trenton threw some Urban Enterprise Zone money at the project as well.

Was it worth it?

The "restaurant" that was envisioned for the site is a Subway sandwich shop (and not a new business...just one that relocated from around the corner on State Street).

One of the retail spaces just recently became a yoga studio. Another retail space appears to remain vacant.

Has it helped revitalize the downtown? Not really.

We will leave the discussion of how much favoritism might have been shown this particular developer, and why, for another time. (Read here and here for previous posts on this).

Enter the Matrix

Just a block from the Woodrose property is another development project that was hailed as a turning point for the city. That would be the office building at 32 East Front Street that currently houses the regional offices of Wells Fargo (nee, Wachovia) bank.

Originally undertaken by the Economic Development Corporation for Trenton, the project encompassed taking a former two level parking lot and building a parking garage and office building on the site. The garage would be turned over to the Trenton Parking Authority to operate as a replacement for the surface lot. The office building was to house the offices of the Hill Wallack law firm along with other commercial/retail space.

The EDCT was another initiative of the Palmer administration. For sizable contributions, local institutions received seats on the non-profit development corporation's board. In simple terms, the idea was the seed money would fund the development of the buildings. The monies realized from the successful completion of the initial project would be rolled back into the EDCT's fund so it could do other projects.

The short version of a long story is that the EDCT failed to complete the project. It was taken over by an experienced, professional developer and finished. The original anchor tenant, Hill Wallack, opted out of the deal. Finally, Wachovia (now Wells Fargo) moved their offices from Ewing to the building.

The building was never fully rented out. When the current lease is up sometime later this year, Wells Fargo will apparently be vacating the space downtown for quarters in West Windsor.

If the past is an indication

The point of all this is to give the proponents of TESC project some perspective.

Economic development in Trenton is not easy. It is complicated by the politics one has to play. Good deals (like the Enterprise Real Estate proposal for the Caola building) are shunted aside for less desirable ones (Woodrose's version) that end up costing the city more and have marginal effect (like the hotel).

In the end, we, the taxpayers, lose.

Development has been and continues to be more about the political connections and the well-being of the principals and government officials. Your run of the mill, tax paying resident is the ultimate pawn in these deals because, when the promised benefits fail to materialize, we pick up the slack. And the tab.

There has never been a long view of what was best for the city. Our leaders have never looked much past the current or next election cycle when it comes to making development deals.

Former Mayor Doug Palmer said it himself. In an article by Tom Hester, Jr. published in the Times, March 21, 2000, Palmer explains just how long his vision is.

''I don't look at the city today,'' Palmer said. ''I look three, four, five years down the road and what we are doing and what possibly can be.''

Our economic development plans need to look further down the road than the current administration or the next election. We need a policy and process in place that guides our decisions past what is best at the moment and toward that goal of sustainable revenue growth.

It is long past time for this city to move beyond the "loss leader" mentality and favored nations deals and work towards the creation of a comprehensive development strategy that is fair to all proposals. Moreover, fair to the taxpayers as well.

The TESC proposal, as it stands at this writing, simply does not help us towards a financially secure future.

Meanwhile, about that bust

None of what you are about to read will come as a surprise to you. It certainly didn’t to us.

Ever since word began trickling out last November that Anthony Roberts and company had concocted a plan to place a bust of President Obama in city hall, we’ve been questioning the process used to fund the bust and the motives behind it.

There was already a bust of a president, John F. Kennedy, in the city hall atrium. The bust was in city hall before the annex was built. This made us curious about the how’s and wherefore’s and why’s of that bust.

 



Probably the first question to come to mind is what is the JFK bust made of?

We weren’t sure. We thought maybe metal but then we looked at it again and thought, “Maybe stone.” The impression of stone comes from the softer, rounder edges of the sculpture compared to the sharper edges of the Obama figure. Regardless, even a novice can tell just by looking that the JFK bust has more heft. Not only is it larger in dimensions than the new arrival, it just radiates a sense of mass, a sense of substance.

Next, we wondered how it came to be in its niche in city hall.

That wasn’t tough. After President Kennedy was slain memorials sprang up everywhere. Schools, airports, roads and public buildings were named after him. Busts and portraits were installed in public edifices everywhere.

Who paid for the bust of JFK?

Good question. Something deep down inside told us the bust was NOT purchased by the city fathers. Surely some group came forward with the idea of raising the money and purchasing the bust and donating it to the city.

Thanks to Wendy Nardi and the resources in the Trentoniana Collection at the Trenton Free Public Library, here’s what we were able to learn.

According to an article in the Trenton Evening Times, SundayOctober 3, 1965:

 

The Mercer County Barracks NO 1895, Veterans of World War I, are attempting to raise money to purchase a bronze bust of the late President John F. Kennedy.

The veterans chapter wants to donate the bust to the city for display on a granite pedestal in the entrance of the new City Hall Annex.

“Until the new building is constructed it could be displayed at the entrance of City Hall,” said Robert E. Germond, post commander.

Germond explained that the bust would cost approximately $2,300 and that his organization would need all the help it can get to purchase the memorial.

The article goes on to name members of the committee and where contributions could be sent. There is even a commitment to donate any monies raised in excess of the actual cost to the Kennedy Library Foundation.

Three months later, on January 5, 1966, the Times ran another small story that fund raising was in full swing. (The article can be found as part of the same file on the link above)

Finally, on August 15, 1967, the bust of JFK was dedicated. In an article from Sunday, August 13 of that year we learn who the artist was and more. (Page three of the document linked above)

The artist was Anthony Cristofaro, who worked with Mayor’s Assistant Robert Carmignani and Superintendent, Division of Public Property, Joseph McManimon in selecting a permanent site.

Apparently, Mr. Cristofaro was well known enough in the area to not have to be described any further in the article. This was proven with a little more research.

Anthony M. Cristofaro was a native of Italy who came to America when he was 23. He worked as a sculptor and in a quarry before making his way to Trenton where he founded the Liberty Monument Company.

Mr. Cristofaro shared his love of art and talent for sculpting with the community. Besides is commissioned work, he taught sculptingin his studio and, free of charge, to boys at the Junior League’s InternationalInstitute.

At least some of his work was cast at the renowned Roman Bronze Works in New York. This facility was favored by artists such as Frederick Remington and firms like Tiffany and Company.

So, what does this all mean?

• When the notion to memorialize the late President Kennedy was conceived, a plan was developed.
• A committee outside of the sphere of local government was created.
• Fund raising was conducted publicly with notices in the local press.
• A local artist was chosen to execute the work.
• The bust is cast in bronze. Really.
• The placement of the bust was worked out in coordination with the facilities people in city government.

 

It means things were done right; correctly; openly.

We can’t say that about the Obama bust now, can we.

And we’re not surprised.

 

NOTE: According to one CPI calculator we found, that $2,300 in 1965 would have the purchasing power of $16,800 today. Understandable considering the cost of bronze (which is mostly copper), the size of the bust, the size of the pedestal, etc. 

 

 

Read this. And weep.

Short and sweet. That is what last night's council meeting wasn't.

As you might imagine most of the evening was spent listening to the pros and cons of the proposed TESC deal to develop the Glen Cairn Arms site.I think pretty much everyone in the room agrees that the site is an eyesore long in need of a makeover.

You can probably find almost as many people who agree the existing buildings, though they were once marvelous, must come down. Plus the asbestos on the premises must be dealt with.

And it is a safe bet that most people would agree that both the prior administration and this one have fumbled the handling of this property. From the clumsy seizure by eminent domain that resulted in the city (the taxpayers) settling with the owner for at least $3.3 million dollars (possibly more...if the original $1 million was not included in that settlement...no one seems to know at this point) to the refusal to put the additional money into razing the buildings and prepping the site for development; the city of Trenton has failed to handle this situation well.

There are almost as many people who are, overall, fans of Thomas Edison State College. Although techinically a college without walls, the institution under the firm and steady hand of Dr. George Pruitt has made a committment to Trenton even as other colleges and universities with traditional ties to the city have turned their backs on us. Where the division remains is whether this proposal is the best we can do, especially since it will result in removing the property from the tax rolls. Forever.

Trenton has a fiscal problem. We scream and shout about the fact that the state occupies so much space in the city and pays so little. Yet we are being asked to give them another .9 of an acre. Yes. TESC is offering a "one time" payment of $300,000 in lieu of taxes. True, this is more than the site has generated in the past 16 years or so. But we can't change the past. We can only change the future.
Giving TESC the property for only $300,000 guarantees us no tax revenues in the future. Ever.

Now those who favor the proposal will tell you there are ancillary benefits. They site jobs, increased foot traffic and patronage for local businesses and encouragement for others to invest in the city.

Nice, but...

Jobs: Yes, there will be some construction jobs. There is no guarantee that those jobs will go to Trenton residents. More importantly, there will be the same potential for short-term construction jobs no matter who builds on that site. We were also told that constructing this nursing school facility will create teaching jobs. Well, maybe. But wouldn't those jobs be created wherever the college sites the nursing school? And, again, how many of these teaching jobs are going to go to Trenton residents?

Increased foot traffic/patronage: Just what businesses are going to be supported by the students at this school? There is a coffee shop in the building catty-corner across the street from the site. Beyond that, it is two blocks to the nearest businesses. It is more likely that students and employees short on time will walk to Antonio's in Morrisville than to any of the restaurants downtown. And do we know whether or not there will be some sort of snack bar or cafeteria in the new building? If there is, then the building becomes more or less self-contained and the staff and students won't have to leave to get food.

Spurring economic development: Getting rid of the eyesore of the vacant buildings may help. But we also need to work on having a cleaner, safer city that is more attractive to investment. In order to do that, we need to have revenue. And that brings us back to the taxes.

Frankly, if TESC agreed to pay an annual, voluntary payment in lieu of taxes, to the city instead of the one time fee, we could feel better about this. It may not be the best use of the property but it would be new and inviting and the city would realize something towards its bottom line.

Maybe a payment equal to 1/4 of the full assessment on the property. That would be something in "our" pocket. It would also set the stage for the city making similar agreements with other non-profit property owners.

Dr. Pruitt seemed to not want to consider this. He referred more than once to the city taking up the tax status of non-profits with the legislature. He seemed to ignore the fact that Princeton University pays something to its host town in lieu of taxes. Lawrence Township is asking Rider and the Lawrenceville School to make similar payments I believe. Same in Hightstown with the Peddie School.

It is time for Trenton to stand up for itself.

That is what we are asking the council to do.

We have an offer from TESC on the table. Tell them "No!" Firmly. And suggest something more to the taxpayer's advantage.

Let's get real about this and stop being so desperate for development that we give away the store.

How does this look to you?

The late Art Holland, when he was the mayor of Trenton, used to say that it wasn’t enough for a public official to be honest; they also need to appear honest.

This was just an inside out way of saying that appearances can be deceiving and even if your intentions are pure, things might not look that way.

Appearance and intent seem to be the crux of the current Federal case against the current mayor of Trenton, Tony Mack. The mayor, his brother Ralphiel and supporter JoJo Giorgianni have been arrested and indicted on charges they conspired to use the Tony’s office to profit from a proposed (and, we now know, bogus) development scheme. Did they really intend to personally profit from the mayor’s position as head of city government? Or were they sincerely trying to get a “deal done” that would benefit the city?

Last week, it was revealed that the FBI has another investigation going in Trenton. According to Alex Zdan of the Times, the Feds have subpoenaed documents pertaining to five housing developments started under the prior administration of long-time mayor Doug Palmer. Zdan broke the story on Saturday, December 29 and had a follow up piece on Monday, December 31.

Coming back around to an investigation that apparently started two or three years ago, the federal subpoena requests the city of Trenton turn over accounting and payment records for the Pennington, Southwest Village I and Southwest Village II, Canal Plaza Homeownership and Catherine S. Graham Square redevelopment projects. All were being “shepherded” by Robert Kahan. 

Kahan has been doing redevelopment work in Trenton since at least 1997 when he formed the Warren Street Urban Renewal Limited Partnership.  Over the years, Kahan and/or his Tara ConstructionManagement/Tara Developers/Tara Developers II have worked on several projects around Trenton.

Tara worked on the Bellevue Court project with Isles a decade ago.

Then something happened. Tara and/or Kahan were suddenly all over the place.

Between April 2005 and April 2006, Kahan formed five LLC’s to work on five separate projects within the city of Trenton. He also formed Tara Developers LLC in April of 2006.

• Spring Street Housing, LLC (Southwest Village I) formed 4-26-05
• Titus Housing, LLC (Pennington) formed 4-27-05
• Broad Street Commons, LLC (Canal Plaza) formed 4-27-05
• Monmouth Management at Trenton, LLC (Catherine S. Graham Square) formed 11-15-05
• Tara Developers, LLC formed 4-5-06
• Passaic Street Housing, LLC formed 4-27-06

Forming LLC’s for redevelopment projects is apparently a fairly standard way of operating. It is at least an attempt to isolate the individual from any liabilities the corporate entity might encounter…especially those caused by other parties (contractors and such).

At the time they were created, the state of NJ, public records show that the registered address and agent for all except the Monmouth Management at Trenton, LLC was 1512 East Wheat Road in Vineland. Robert Kahan is listed as the registered agent and managing member.

Monmouth Management at Trenton, LLC was created between Tara and 319 Elton LLC, a company owned by Dov Gluck of Lakewood, NJ. In the initial incorporation, Monmouth Management at Trenton listed its registered address 1245 Airport Road, Lakewood and Gluck was the registered agent.

So far, nothing appears to be amiss.

In July 2005, Tara Construction Management, LLC (one of Kahan’s companies) contributed $1000 to then Mayor Doug Palmer’s re-election campaign. Tara had also given the Palmer campaign $1000 in June of 2003.

(NOTE: the pages from all the campaign reports referenced can be found here)

Although done all the time, contributions from LLC’s and LP’s are actually prohibited in New Jersey. While the corporate entity can issue the check, the contribution is credited to the member or partner who signs the check unless there is an accompanying letter explaining how the contribution should be distributed amongst all partners/members. Remember this for later and read on. {Edited for clarity.}

Tara Construction Management also contributed $700 to the re-election campaign of then East Ward Councilman Gino Melone in that same time span. Plus, Tara had contributed $250 to Melone’s campaign in January of 2005.

On June 1, 2005, a mortgage was issued between the City of Trenton and Spring Street Housing, LLC (one of Kahan’s companies). This was the start of the Southwest Village I project and came a little over a month before that July contribution to Palmer.

How do things appear now?

As the calendar turned over to 2006, things started to get interesting. In May of that year, Palmer would be up for re-election to his fifth term as Mayor. Campaign contributions really picked up.

There must have been a big fundraiser on March 15, 2006 because the ELEC reports are filled with contributions with that date. Lots of contractors and vendors and developers who were doing or wanted to do business with the city show up in the reports, but one in particular stands out: NDK General Contractors, LLC of Vineland.

NDK was formed by three sisters, Nicole, Davina and Kathleen Kemenash. The registered address for the business was 1512 East Wheat Road, Vineland. If that sounds familiar, it should. Kahan registered several of his development LLC’s to that same address.

NDK gave Palmer $1000 on March 15. So did each of the three sisters. Remember the law about contributions from LLC’s? That’s $4000 in contributions to be apportioned amongst the three of them. If divided equally, they are each just a little more than halfway to the $2600 individual limit for political contributions. Oh, and back on July 20, 2005, NDK gave Palmer $1000.

Back to March 15, 2006, five employees of NDK General Contracting also gave $1000 each to Palmer’s campaign. While it is entirely possible that these people gave freely of their own money, how probable is it?

How likely that an office manager, two secretaries, an estimator and a consultant from a construction firm in Vineland, NJ really care who gets elected in Trenton?  The office manager, by the way, had given a previous donation to Palmer. Although not listed as being affiliated with NDK in the reports for that contribution, Lisa Bancia gave a $1000 contribution to the Palmer campaign on July 20, 2005. That is the third contribution of $1000 to Palmer on that particular date. One from Tara, one from NDK and one from Ms. Bancia.

On one day, $9000 in contributions to Doug Palmer’s re-election campaign came from one company, its owners and employees. It’s not what it appears like. Right?

Office manager Lisa Bancia gave another $1000 to Palmer on May 6, 2006. This put her over the limit and Palmer’s campaign reportedly refunded her the $400 in excess contributions. This was part of another wave of contributions to Palmer’s campaign that appear to have come from/through NDK. Besides Bancia, the three sisters who formed the company each gave $1000 again, as did NDK General Contractors itself. That’s $8000 in contributions which puts the three ladies over the limit if apportioned equally. The estimator gave another $1000. That’s $6000 more that definitely came through NDK.

There were also three woman who each gave $1000 and who all list addresses in Vineland. The report does not show their occupation or employer information (as required by law). Hmmm. That doesn’t appear quite right.

Election Day was May 9 that year. On May 10, Palmer’s campaign report shows that one of the secretaries at NDK gave another $1000.

Tara wasn’t keeping its checkbook closed either. In November of 2005, Gino Melone received another $200 from the construction management firm. Melone also received $250 from Tara on April 17, 2006.  Well within the contribution limits, but again a violation of the LLC's can't contribute rule.

On May 6, a gentleman by the name of Keith Karmitian (hard to make out the handwriting on the report) gave $1000 to Palmer’s campaign. This was interesting because the address given is in Philadelphia. In fact, it is the same address listed for a $1000 contribution to then Councilman At Large Paul Pintella’s re-election campaign that came from Scott Kahan who listed his occupation as “Developer”. It appears that Scott is the son ofRobert Kahan and that Scott works with his father. (If you go to the Tara Developers website, contact us page, there are links to contact Robert, Scott and a “Keith” as well as a couple of other individuals.)

The Scott Kahan contribution to Pintella’s campaign is dated May 24, 2006. There was a runoff for the at-large council seats that year so the campaigning (and fundraising) continued for another month.

Robert Kahan, a “Developer”, also gave Pintella’s campaign $1000 on May 24, 2006.

Funny thing, NDK General Contractors and President/Owner Nicole Kemenash also contributed $1000 each to Pintella on that same date, May 24, 2006.

Pintella and the rest of the Palmer slate (Manny Segura, Cordelia Staton) went on to win the runoff election in June of 2006. You can view a timeline of all this here.

In July of 2006, the Pennington Housing project (Titus Housing, LLC, a Kahan company) got underway. The Canal Plaza project started in earnest in June of 2007. The Southwest Village II (Passaic Street) and Catherine Graham Square (Monmouth Management at Trenton) projects got underway in April and July of 2008.

NDK General Contractor was involved in the Pennington Housing project according to construction liens filed by suppliers waiting to get paid. Some of the liens were satisfied but one wasn’t. The contractor letits state license lapse at the end of 2006. It has not kept up with its annual corporate filings to the state either and is currently suspended pending reinstatement.

Kahan formed Tara Developers II, LLC in 2010 and maintains an office on West State Street in Trenton. Kahan had, in the meantime, changed all of his registered addresses for the various project related LLC’s from Vineland to the Trenton address.

We don’t know what the FBI will find through their investigation. We know what the situation appears to be. In an effort to secure at least five redevelopment deals, Mr. Kahan and friends made at least $30,000 in campaign contributions to Doug Palmer, Paul Pintella and Gino Melone between May 2002 and May 2006.

In Alex Zdan’s article published on December 31, Doug Palmer is quoted as saying, “It doesn’t involve me or my administration.”

He may be right. But that isn’t the way it appears.