This from the Mayor’s Message on the Haddon Twp Website.
REDEVELOPMENT IN HADDON TOWNSHIP By Mayor Randy Teague
There are three large parcels of land on or near Haddon Avenue that have been the subject of much discussion and controversy for many years: the Dy-Dee property, the Westmont Theatre, and the Russel Cast Stone site. These properties have been either decaying, vacant or contaminated for more than fifteen years. Not only has the town lost millions of dollars in tax revenue as these parcels sit idle, the Haddon Avenue corridor has remained stagnant while neighboring towns have flourished. Given the economic times, it is now more imperative than ever that the redevelopment projects move forward on these properties.
DY-DEE Environmental investigation is currently proceeding at the site, which is being paid for by grants we aggressively pursued from the State. The environmental investigation at the site has revealed that the Dy-Dee property is not the only contaminated property at the site. Several neighboring industrial properties have also been declared contaminated. Before construction can begin, the extent of contamination of the site must be investigated in order to prepare a plan for cleanup. Once the cleanup plan is approved by the Department of Environmental Protection, cleanup of the contaminated properties can begin. The Township is currently in the investigation phase of this process. We have been successful in receiving in excess of $1.4 million to pay for the environmental investigation activities at the site. In addition, the recent Brownfields Development Area (BDA) designation provides the Township access to up to 75% in grants for the cleanup of the property. The developer will pay the remaining 25% of costs.
In the planning stages, Towne Center at Haddon (the project’s formal name) has been recognized as a model for transit village redevelopment by the independent Delaware Valley Smart Growth Alliance. Towne Center has been deemed consistent with New Jersey’s environmental policies and has been designated as a Brownfields Development Area by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection.
Fifteen of the sixteen properties that make up the site have either been acquired or are under agreement to be acquired. The only remaining property is located in the center of the site, The property has two tenants, a retail insurance agency and an industrial business which uses the property to park trucks and store materials and equipment for environmental investigations. There is no residential use at this property.
The Township and Fieldstone have offered the tenants the following options to ease this transition:
Offered to relocate their offices into the new Towne Center development including special project designs to meet their needs and a phasing plan to avoid disruption of their businesses.
Provided opportunities to purchase or lease office space with a similar market value to their existing offices
Presented a cash offer of up to $850,000. This figure is almost 60% in excess of the appraised value at that time of $540,000.
Unfortunately, these negotiations have not been successful to date. With all but this one property either under agreement or acquired, and almost all of the buildings demolished, Towne Center at Haddon is poised to move forward. Indeed, many residents have expressed their pleasure at the demolition of the Dy-Dee building and the adjacent properties as they see the longstanding eyesores disappear.
RUSSELL CAST STONE SITE The Russell Cast Stone site is located on West Albertson Avenue just off of Haddon Avenue. This former cement facility has been vacant for over ten years. After much discussion with the owners of the site, the Walters Group, a site concept plan was created for approximately eighty-one townhouse style apartments. There will be no eminent domain for this project as the Walters Group owns the entire tract. The Planning Board unanimously approved the Redevelopment Plan for the site and the Mayor and Commissioners adopted the plan this past January.
The Walters Group is working on the site-plan for Albertson Village (official name for the project), which is expected to be presented to the Planning Board in the next couple of months. Construction is expected to begin by the end of the year barring any unforeseen circumstances. The project will be constructed utilizing various types of environmentally friendly “green” technologies.
WESTMONT THEATRE This project is the subject of litigation between the Westmont Development Group (Pang) and the Township. The Township’s position is that the Westmont Development Group breached the Redevelopment Agreement. Westmont Development Group filed suit against Haddon Township. The Township has filed for Summary Judgment to dismiss the case and we are awaiting a decision by the Judge. Not only is the Township not receiving any tax revenue from this property, but as a result of a lease arrangement signed in 1998, Haddon Township pays approximately $65,000 per year for this property.
Filed under: Uncategorized |
Twp of Haddon 
Thanks Jen for putting up this topic. There is a lot to discuss about it. I will start with Fieldstone.
So Fieldstone is “poised to move ahead”. Does Fieldstone have financing? Have you seen a proforma? How long will it take to build and sell? Is there a market for the condos? Have you seen a marketability analysis on this so that when they don’t sell and the town has put up $6 million in infrastructure costs (including environmental clean up) the rest of us are not left holding the bag. Can we make that condo marketability analysis available to the public? Why is the town’s balance sheet and credit capacity being used to provide favorable financing on a risky speculative project? How does the built out dovetail with the debt payments on the bonds? How are you planning for those risks? In my opinion, I just don’t see the market for these condos.
Mr. Mayor, you say that Fieldstone will be paying for 25% of the environmental clean up. Don’t they have the right use the infrastructure bonds so that effectively we the taxpayers are paying for this? Do you have any written agreement with them that they won’t be doing this?
I would like to say I am pleased with us starting the “investigation” stage on this clean up but quite frankly $1.4 million for environmental investigation activities is a HUGE number. We could have a team of 10 guys working full time for a year to run up fees like that. Yes the state is paying for it, but it sure seems like there are a lot of professional feeding off the public trough. There is no incentive to save money in this situation because the public is paying it. And we wonder why the state is having it’s financial woes.
Mayor Teague – we have a great forum and encourage you to post on here to educate the people of this town about what is really going on. There are a lot of questions that require more than the 5 minute egg timer rule. In order to build the confidence of the people of this town, you need to be able to answer these questions openly.
In the end, we all want successful redevelopment. Our town has never seen that when the government has been involved. You have started a communication with us through your website posting and we encourage open and transparent further communication.
I have a lot more to ask about but this should get it started.
What will happen when this gets built on Haddon Ave and nothing sells like in Collingswood? We will have to pay with an increase in taxes. I felt sorry for the property owners who lost their homes to the township (and it is still on going on). But these people were the lucky ones.
They got out of town. I wish I could afford to leave.
These commissioners are the worst any town has had.
What amazes me is that we put something good up and “poof” no posts. No backing, no positive feedback, no pat on the back for the Commissioners.
I think the Russell Stone project will do well especially since the contractors seem very open and flexible with the residents. On the other hand flexibility does not seem to be a high priority with Fieldstone.
I hope the Commissioners do the right thing when it comes time to make a decision for the Westmont Theater.
I agree with you Jen. The Westmont Theater is something that no other town around us really has. And we have 2. The Ritz and the Westmont. If we do this right then all the businesses will do well. But, these commissioners have a terrible track record and I have no confidence in them or their friends that run the town.
Remember to get additional town information join my email list. It is confidential. No one but myself knows who is on the list. Send me an email jonjenja@verizon.net
I try to send at least one if not two emails a week updating residents of the happenings in the town. You also will receive links to articles and a recap of the town meetings.
You don’t have to be a resident to receive the emails. Anyone can sign up
I see the Mayor has remained silent.
Regarding Russell Cast Stone, let’s hope the developers can get the financing for the project. It is a nicely conceived rental property. I will vastly improve the neighborhood. If the town can work with the neighbors on Lindes Farne to minimize the traffic impact, it should be a good for the town. I hope they can lease at the prices needed to make it successful.
I find it really interesting that the mayor calls the Sulock’s tenants. Although it is technically true, this is a family owned building which the same family has 2 separate unrelated business “leases”. The problem here is that people have property rights in NJ. So just because the town and redeveloper offers something, doesn’t mean that the property owner has any requirement to sell. I was looking for the last sentence which he doesn’t say. “If they don’t sell, we will use eminent domain to take it.” It will be in litigation for years.
We elected these guys to be our representatives. Do you call sezing private property the right thing to do? They are getting us into more law suits than the last administration. I guess the only ones that benefit are other lawyers. (there buddies I’m sure).
We need commissioners to protect the people in town. Not go after them like these guys are doing.
Wow – more lawsuits? Could you be more specific about what lawsuits have been filed because of something the commissioners have done? Please exclude the holdover stuff from Pang and Kathy Hogan’s appeals.
100% of the properties were bought by the developer. NO ED
This is a great time to move forward with the plan. Envir invest will take, what 6-9 months or more, then building can start. That won’t be done for another year or so. This econ will have long since turned around. As long as Fieldstone has the capital or access to it, why stop?
The state has been having lots of financial woes that started when the Dems took over. Spending problems…not rev problem, but our Dem brain trust Trenton doesn’t get it. Tom, since you attend those Dem functions at the county, could you please weigh in and defend your Dem’s at the state?
I am glad you asked about litigation.
As for lawsuits, I have read that we are being sued by Wildwood for police poaching. And Klineburger, our township solicitor, was quoted in the paper saying that we wouldn’t be liable unless the officers had been offered “full time” positions by Wildwood. Actually, I looked up the law and it said “Permanent employment” which in a shore town could mean permanent seasonal work. It would be nice to get it resolved. Our town looks foolish by the solicitor’s response.
As a result of the commissioners efforts to redo the Dydee redevelopment zone, Sulock, the last property owner who will not sell, has filed a lawsuit to protect his property. This comes after the town dropped its defense of the previous lawsuit and started spending all of our taxpayer money redoing the improperly established original redevelopment plan. So this lawsuit is a direct result of the commissioners’ actions.
I don’t know of others even though I have all the legal bills from our solicitor. The bill is so heavily and illegally redacted that we the taxpayers don’t even have a chance to know what they are doing in secret relating to litigation. Ditto for the minutes of the closed door meetings.
Those are 2 lawsuits I know about resulting from the commissioners’ actions, and if they had open meetings where they discussed the issues, or they had properly established closed door meetings where they disclosed the specific matters to be discussed by following the Open Public Meetings Act laws, then we would potentially know of more. But instead, when I asked the mayor on the public record, he improperly claimed attorney client privilege. So why won’t the mayor disclose this? It clearly gives the appearance of secrecy that they don’t want the people of the town to know about.
Relating to Dydee, I too want to see the site cleaned up but to spend the $1.4 million for environmental surveys boggles the mind. Our commissioners tapped the state for it, one the reasons the state is in such trouble. If I told my boss that I wanted to spend $1.4 million to investigate the pollution on the site, he would throw me out of his office. They do not appear to be motivated to do this in the most cost effective was possible. I have previously written my views on why it will fail.
Actually, the state woes go back to the Whitman administration when she lowered all the tax rates and started the monumental increase in the state debt. That would be like attempting to blame the current recession on Obama as the Republicans are already trying to do. I agree the dems should have attacked this problem also, but quite frankly, that is for another blog, since this one devoted to Haddon Township. I won’t comment on it further here.
This blog is not about me, and any discussions are strictly there to divert the attention of our residents and taxpayers from the issues of our town. I am just a guy who attends meetings, asks questions (difficult and pointed right at the heart of the problems at times) and writes on the blog. It is amazing that a short time resident, such as myself, can just by asking questions, be attacked on the blog. I am proud of that accomplishment because it shows that I really am making a positive difference. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.
Tom, I agree with you, you can’t blame this recession and the credit problems on Obama but you can certainly point towards the liberal Democrats, Barney Frank and others, that have a big hand in this mess by forcing lenders to take on bad loans.
Actually the problem is not any politician. It is the lenders. They were more interested as to whether they could sell the loans, rather than whether the borrowers could repay them. If they had just focused on repayment, this mess never would have occurred.
Sorry Tom, lenders hands were forced to take on a lot of those loans.
If you would like a lesson in whole loan sales and residential securitizations, email me directly where this conversation is more appropriate. I would rather talk about the secret meetings and lawsuits.
Again, the biggest problem is we have no idea what lawsuits are out there because they won’t say what we discussed at the secret meetings.
By the way, it is now officially “Sunshine Week” http://www.sunshineweek.org
It is a week sponsored by the press to make everyone more aware of Government in the Sunshine. In New Jersey, this is called the Open Public Meetings Act or OPMA. Our commissioners are having great difficulty meeting the requirements of the law as you have previously read.
Happy Sunshine Week to All.
No need Tom, I’d school you. I’ve spoken to you a few times in the past, and listened to your ideas that were pure crap. You need to get past your self importance.
You obviously are the one with the chip on your shoulder who doesn’t even post with your name (for fear of self embarrassment).
No discussion of town issues? I wonder why.
Here’s a link to the CP article titled, “Wildwood sues Wash. Twp, Haddon Twp. over police training”
http://tinyurl.com/cxbkfg
Mr. Cassel wrote, “We are being sued by Wildwood for police poaching.”
That’s his characterization.
Wildwood Police Chief Long said he doubles the 46 man full time force with class II officiers for the May to October season. That means he hires 46 additional policeman.
Police Chief Long also said 15 to 25 return and 4 go on to other police departments.
Where’s the poaching? Police Chief Long already acknowledges most of them ARE NOT COMING BACK.
Mr. Cassel also wrote, “Klineburger, our township solicitor, was quoted in the paper saying that we wouldn’t be liable unless the officers had been offered “full time” positions by Wildwood. Actually, I looked up the law and it said “Permanent employment” which in a shore town could mean permanent seasonal work”
There was only ONE quote attributed to Mr. Klineburger and that wasn’t it. Quotes are surrounded by QUOTATION MARKS! He may have said Permanent Employment and not Full Time. For all you know, he used the correct terms and the writer opted for brevity.
Mr. Cassel doesn’t like Mr. Klineburger so he spun the article to portray the solicitor as foolish.
Mr. Cassel is entitled to his own opinions, but he’s not entitled to his own facts
St. Idiot said “There was only ONE quote attributed to Mr. Klineburger and that wasn’t it. Quotes are surrounded by QUOTATION MARKS! He may have said Permanent Employment and not Full Time.”
May have said? How do you know? You are stating a hypothetical, not a fact. I quoted from the article.
Here is that exact quote: “Klineburger said the fees need to be paid only if Wildwood offered the officer a full-time job.”
I stand by my “full-time” quote as coming from the article. If you are Mr. Klineburger and you are responding to this, say so. That would be a breath of fresh air to actually hear from our commissioners about their position on this.
The real issue is whether our town is responsible to reimburse Wildwood. Because training of police officers is so expensive, we have a state law which states that if one town hires (or poaches) another town’s police officers during the first 2 years of their service, the hiring town is responsible for reimbursing the town that paid for the training for a portion of the costs of training. Again. THIS IS A STATE LAW.
You are correct I don’t like Mr. Klineburger. He sits in the Commission meeting texting and smirking. He prepares bills that don’t accurately reflect the dates of when he did the work. He participated in an “Open meeting” on Feb 3 that wasn’t advertised as open.
Our solicitor does not show on his website any municipal government experience in his background. He is a litigator. In my opinion, we have the wrong guy for the wrong job. And he and his partner did donate money to the commissioners. And that is a fact.
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/
20090223_Wildwood_sues_2_towns_over_
police_training.html
http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/
20090224/NEWS01/902240351
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/wildwood.police.
lawsuit.2.941553.html
http://www.pressofatlanticcity.com/181/
story/395107.html
Here are four different articles on the Wildwood topic.
You can decide for yourself how the Township is handling this.
You wrote his remarks as if they quoted verbatim… they weren’t.
You wrote, “Here is that exact quote: ‘Klineburger said the fees need to be paid only if Wildwood offered the officer a full-time job.’ “
Wrong. You, quoting the article, is not the same as the writer quoting Mr. Klineburger.
I am not Mr. Klineburger… don’t know him, never met him, never spoke to him. I’m just someone who appreciates the truth. Anyone who takes the time to read the article will see clearly, you did not deliver the truth.
I’m not disputing THIS IS STATE LAW and neither is anyone in the article. The only argument is if the law applies, hence the review. That’s perfectly appropriate.
His partner donated money to a political campaign? So what? Is it illegal?
You complain he’s a litigator and not a Municpal Law expert.
Excuse me, but when one town sues another, isn’t that litigation? And wouldn’t you want a litigator?
“I’m just someone who appreciates the truth.”
Me too. And I appreciate transparency. I appreciate open government. I quoted the article. I stand by my post. I don’t know how you would know more than what the article says.
If you appreciate the truth, why you keep changing the name that you post under? You posted under different names yesterday clearly from the series of posts and the writing style.
Why not be truthful and post with your real name or at least under one consistent pseudonym?
Relating to litigators, no I don’t think our town needs a solicitor whose main livelihood is litigation. In fact, we need a solicitor who understands the intracacies of municipal law first. By having that knowledge and doing thing properly, we can avoid litigation which in the end is way better than litigating. If we need a litigator, we should hire a litigator. If we need a municipal solicitor, hire someone experienced in that area of the law. It is just common and good business sense.
You can stand by your remarks all you want… You’re still wrong.
You represented the reporter’s summary of a conversation as Mr. Klineburger’s quote. It was not a quote, therefore you cannot state with 100% certainty he said “Full Time” instead of the more appropriate “Permanent Employment”. He may have said Full Time, he may have said permanent employment… you don’t know because it was not a quote.
This is my 3rd post in my entire life. I’ve never posted under another name.
The only qualification necessary to practice law is a valid license. Municipal Law is not complex. You saying it’s complex, does not make it so.
How dare you question the great and all-knowing Tom Cassel. Why you must be one of those CRAZIES that Jen talks about.
I didn’t write that last anonymous post
I don’t seem to recall referring to anyone as “CRAZIES”. mean spirited, low life, I do recall, when making up lies about me and attacking my family. I’m sure I’ll get a response to this later tonight when the kids are in bed.
“CRAZIES” would not come from me. Everyone is entitled to post their opinion when it pertains to the blog or concerns about the town.
I just got back from my time in Florida and was looking at this site. On one hand, Tom fights for openess and fiscal soundness but those Dems you hang out with are the problem. For example, it mentioned in the Retrospect that Pat Abusi, the Dem municipal guy in HT, was appointed by then Colls Commissioner Cappelli, now Freeholder Capelli, to be the CFO in Colls for $1,500 per year. Same thing in HT and Waterford when they were controlled by Dems. Those positions, held for years, count towards years into the state pension plan. Now he’s working for the SJ Port Corp for 100k. He is eligible for a state pension based on 100k because he worked for years as the CFO earning $1,500 – doing what? My point is that you profess openenss and good government, yet stand side by side those who have played the system and padded pensions. You are critical of the cost of a needed envirnomental cleanup, critical of Klineberger’s experience and yet say what about your friends?
I wonder if you’ll have the guts to respond and provide clarity.
Why everytime that I bring up a topic, are people who are not part of our township government attacked? I am obviously striking a chord with our commissioners.
I don’t have all the facts nor is this an issue of our town, as the person mentioned does not work for our town. He is a township resident and involved in the democratic club. That is how I met him. Perhaps you should call Lavinia at the Courier or Brett at the Retrospect and have them investigate. That being said, I do believe that the state pension system needs a major overhaul and people should not be entitled to excessive pensions from milking the system. I stood up vociferously relating to Chief Gallagher on that issue in the past. Again, a township employee.
Irrespective, this is a state, not a town issue. My focus has been on our town and its government. Thank you for acknowledging my goal of openness and transparency in our town.
Perhaps we can focus on our issues, primarily the redevelopment in Haddon Township which is the subject of this blog. There are a lot of important things to say on that topic.
As a reminder about the Westmont Theatre, the Marquee at the Westmont is still standing despite the money wasted on an RFP to remove it. That was done without any public discussion. We only found out about it through a public notice placed in the newspapers, yet another example of government done behind closed doors. So we wasted money on our engineers to prepare the RFP and several contractors prepared responses to something that is and won’t be done in the forseeable future, wasting their time. Now that the Russell Cast Stone site’s future is getting clarity, the development of the Theatre site will become more and more problematic without the availability of off site parking that the Russell Cast Stone site might have offered. There was nothing that required the 2 to be connected, but with some creativity and upzoning, there was an opportunity that now is gone. Clearly, it makes the Westmont site, significantly less desirable in the future.
Tom,
Why exactly do you live in HT?
You have an issue with everything in town and anyone who has ever governed in town except for Kathy Hogan. Do you participate in any other township activities except for the commissioner meetings? Are you involved with HTAA, PTA, anything at all? You didn’t like Haddonfield or Florida, are you ever happy?
Why don’t you organize a group of your peers to clean up a street in HT or doing something constructive to show you are a good citizen of HT. The only think you do is tear the town apart.
Mr. Cassel wrote, “Marquee at the Westmont is still standing despite the money wasted on an RFP to remove it. That was done without any public discussion.”
Was Public dicussion required? Were the commissioners obligated?
Just a general question and I’m sure I’ll be accused of coming to Tom’s defense. I am not, he can do that on his own.
Here is my question…If you don’t participate in town activities but are concerned about the government within the town you are now a bad citizen of HT? You have just put at least 1/2 our town in one grouping.
I’m guessing many Senior Citizens, single adults and couples without children would tend to fall into this category.
It probably is a good thing you choose to not give your name.
The Commissioners are obligated to meet the requirements of the Open Public Meetings Act which means that all discussions among more than one commissioner in our town about township business are REQUIRED to be held in public. You, er I mean, they don’t grasp that concept. It is very straight forward. So the fact that they engaged the township engineer to prepare an RFP without it coming before the commissioners for a vote does not seem to meet the OPMA requirements. I continue to say the same thing over and over again because our commissioners either don’t want to follow or deliberately choose to ignore the law.
I live here because I like it. I liked every prior place I lived as well. As a single dad with a child living in Cherry Hill, I participate in various activities where he lives, not in HT.
Actually by promoting good government and the Sunshine Law, I am doing something extremely “constructive” toward cleaning up this town.
Your missing the point. I am INVOLVED with the town, HTAA, PTA, Performing Arts. Tom is unhappy!. Believe me Tom is well known, but because people don’t attend a township meeting or are involved with their families doesn’t automatically put them in the class of not caring for Haddon Township. People who are generally unhappy will move. This blog is being read by people out of HT and the impression is HT is a rotten place to live after reading Tom’s blog. The question still remains, has Tom contributed in a positive way to benefit his neighborhood or town? Does he contribute any time to civic organizations in HT. From what I understand he doesn’t!
So, by that logic, if two commissioners pass each other in the Wegmans cereal aisle, smile, nod and over their shoulders say to each other, “how about that last meeting? Didn’t Tom Cassel make a great point?”, they violated the law. Or did they?
That is an easy one. Tom is a self appointed expert on everything. Got beat up at a public meeting by then Mayor Parks. The party he backed lost last year and he is still bitter. Claims his motives are better government when it is clear he is self-serving and could care less about this or any other town. Loves to hear himself talk and write but don’t attack him he is a private citizen.
Here’s a link to the NJ Open Public Meetings Act
http://tinyurl.com/c7n5xr
This is the law.
Please tell the audience, the SPECIFIC portion of the law that was broken and why the exceptions don’t apply in the matter of the marquee and its removal.
It is very simple:
a. Except as provided by subsection b. of this section all meetings of public bodies shall be
open to the public at all times.
“Meeting” means and includes any gathering whether corporeal or by means of communication equipment, which is attended by, or open to, all of the members of a public
body, held with the intent, on the part of the members of the body present, to discuss or act
as a unit upon the specific public business of that body. Meeting does not mean or include
any such gathering (l) attended by less than an effective majority of the members of a public
body, or (2) attended by or open to all the members of three or more similar public bodies at
a convention or similar gathering.
There are no exceptions in subsection b. that apply.
An effective majority of a 3 member commission is 2 members.
What is so hard to follow about this simple law?
I am glad at least that we are educating the people of this town on the OPMA. Happy Sunshine Week.
Tom, you haven’t told us what positive activity you do for HT? What volunteer organization do you contribute your time and efforts or is it all negative writing about HT?
Clean open government is my positive activity for Haddon Township. It is Sunshine Week this week so I am glad you asked.
Sunshine Week is a national initiative to open a dialogue about the importance of open government and freedom of information. Participants include print, broadcast and online news media, civic groups, libraries, non-profits, schools and others interested in the public’s right to know.
Sunshine Week is led by the American Society of Newspaper Editors and is funded primarily by a challenge grant from the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation of Miami.
Though spearheaded by journalists, Sunshine Week is about the public’s right to know what its government is doing, and why. Sunshine Week seeks to enlighten and empower people to play an active role in their government at all levels, and to give them access to information that makes their lives better and their communities stronger.
Sunshine Week is a non-partisan initiative whose supporters are conservative, liberal and everything in between.
As a longtime resident of HTWP I think Cassel is a positive contribution to the town.
Just because you are upset he is trying to put a stop to the corruption that is lining the pockets of the township ‘insiders’ is no reason to slam him.
I know you wish he would go away so that you and your cronies can run the town like your private piggy bank while 95% of the taxpayers dont know what is going on.
Forget it. those days over. Next election at the meet the candidates forum they have every question these commissioners refused to answer will be asked again and again and again.
No more dishonest small-town government and backroom deals. New Jersey – welcome to the 21st century.
Mr. Cassell, I asked a specific question… with regard to the Theater Marquee, were the commissioners obligated to hold a discussion. Instead of answering, you repeated the requirements of an Open Public Meeting.
I’m going to take blame for not stating my question more clearly and so I ask…
Yes or no, regarding the Theater Marquee, were the commissioners obligated to hold an open public meeting?
Again, yes or no, if they were obligated and did not hold an open public meeting, did they break the law?
Anonymous wrote, “…corruption that is lining the pockets of the township ‘insiders’…” And he also wrote, “…you wish he would go away so that you and your cronies can run the town like your private piggy bank…”
In case haven’t read today’s posts, it’s Sunshine Week.
So in the spirit of Sunshine Week, could you please list for our audience, the names (first and last please) of the “cronies” and the “insiders” and the dollar amounts,they have collected illegally (or immorally).
Holy Sh**! I stopped blogging some time ago. Cassel is out of control. I cannot wait for the next meeting. He will be spinnig like a top.
Tom by reviewing these blogs you never told us wha Ivy league school you graduated.
I’m trying to understand the reasoning behind asking if a resident participates in anything. Obviously Tom’s interest lies in gov’t while your interest may be school related events. Why is one better than the other?
I’m sure there are PTA members that speak their minds but don’t participate in anything else. Are they bad residents?
How about a coach for HTAA? Maybe they don’t have time to be involved in other areas. Are they bad residents?
I don’t always agree with Tom and at times strongly disagree with his ideas but to state he is a bad resident because he voices his concern is just total nonsense.
St. Evelyn,
You will never ever get a straight answer out of Tom.
In fact I would bet he will avoid the blog for a few days. Tom can ridicule anyone and demand answers from anybody else, but don’t expect the same.
1. Why Ivy League school – he brought it up?
2. How does he contribute to the town except for
writing on a blog?
You have to give credit to Kathy Hogan. She sat up there and was pretty roughed over and she gave it back. But to her credit, she also contributed to the town. Kathy worked for the VETS and Seniors. Believe me I have asked around the last few weeks, Tom does nothing to benefit the public except sit behind his computer
Wow 17/41 posts are by Cassel and Sawchuk. Most of the others involve a backer of the solicitor defending him over a quote about a lawsuit worth nothing.
It is very clear that Cassel and Sawchuk cannot stay on topic because their only desire is to criticize the commissioners.
Simple solution. Go to the meeting and you real realize Tom and Sawchuk are alone. Then return to the blog and it will be very clear Cassel posts as anon.
Tom is the simple mouth piece for Charlie D and Pat Abuse. They lost the election and Tom will stop at nothing to mock and put down the Mayor and Comm on this blog because he cannot do it at the meetings.
Tom has every right to be resident but this has nothing to do with sunshine violations but Tom’s course of action of attackling the Mayor and Comm over politics.
Anonymous wrote, “…Most of the others involve a backer of the solicitor defending him over a quote about a lawsuit …”
I’m writing just to be clear… Honest to G-d, I don’t backe the solicitor, I don’t know him, I’ve never met him, I’ve never talked to him and if someone else got the job tomorrow, I could care less.
I’m a faithful reader of this blog since it’s inception and frankly, I got fed up reading someone spin the truth to hurt someone else and justifying it because they don’t like the guy.
I just don’t like bullies.
Don’t forget 9 from St Evelyn. I did look thru since you brought it up and 13 were in response to anon posters. I really don’t see why you would feel the need to point that out.
Maybe they should not respond? I think that’s why there is a blog.
This is great. We have engaged the people of this town in discussion. That is what this blog is all about. So far, I have helped foster discussion on many issues of our town. This is very healthy and tells me our town has a great future because people really do want to know.
If anyone wants to call me and ask me specific questions, my phone number is listed. Just call. So far, noone has taken me up on that. Instead, they would just rather bash.
St. Ev – when you talk about bullies, google “SLAPP lawsuit”. That is what the solicitor’s law partner threatened me with. That is the definition of bully and the commissioners sat at meetings doing nothing to investigate his involvement.
Mr. Cassel, dance your dance if you wish, but you’ve not answered the two questions I asked at 5:30 pm today… that’s over 2 hours ago.
I don’t understand how you commend a written discourse among contributors to this blog and then complain no one has embraced the opportunity for a private discourse by calling you. That’s confusing… which I’m coming to the conclusion is part of your argumentative MO
I googled SLAPP suits and you were’nt mentioned. Post the complaint and we’ll examine it point by point.
the commissioners and their little band of n’er-do-wells have hijacked the town, taken up taxpayer dollars in insider jobs and pet projects, and refused to answer questions at the meetings. when the questions at the meetings became too tough they put in time limits and started publicly harassing and ridiculing questioners at the meetings.
so then some citizens start a blog to foster the discussion randy teague tried to stop with the police at the meetings.
do the commissioners or their insider buds answer the questions here? No. they just come to the blog and again harass and try to insult and hijack a discussion forum. Then they start posting questions that THEY demand answered about where people went to school.
please randy paul and john it is so transparent what you are doing. if you don’t want to answer the questions here either that is fine but let the citiznes have their discussion. no egg timers on the internet. to repeatedly post (or have your buds post) insulting posts is just sad.
so tom made some allegations. turns out two independent news organizations verified them and they are true. turns out your solicitor did turn in bills that were pretty darn wacky. turns out you did indeed appear to violate the open meetings act. turns out you did pass out jobs to campaign donors while delaying passing pay-to-play reform. turns out you are trying to help facilitate sulock losing his property. turns out you did try to have the police chief physically detain/remove Tom from a meeting. Turns out you did cause more lawsuits. turns out you did hijack tony’s run and co-opt it for your private 501c and never explained what happened to the missing money. turns out you did have bessie the historic tree cut down for fieldstone. turns out you did issue a request for proposals to tear down the theater after you pledged to save it. turns out you did say the poolhouse was falling and a danger but then use it for another summer. turns out dydee is a boondoggle including the cleanup. turns out you have raised taxes by record levels.
well boohoo how is any of that the fault of the blog? you need to answer for your own actions. answer now or next election. i hope you keep on messing up so there is no chance you win again and we can watch you dodge these questions at the meet the candidates night.
and when you three do lose I hope the next administration fires all of your political appointments and has a forensic audit of the township including your 501c, the BID, and TOHIP.
keep on dancing boys cuz the times they are a changing
Classic Tom.
Make accusations, threaten, and never respond when he is asked a question. Nothing has changed in 2 years.
I didn’t vote for Randy and team but I will this time.
If nothing else they have finally controlled Tommy Boy.
The record is already there relating to the Slapp lawsuit. You can find it on the Retrospect website. They laid it out pretty clearly. My point was for you to learn what a Slapp Lawsuit is. It is legal bullying.
If you are interested in finding out where I went to school, it is available on the internet. Check secinfo.com since it has a better search than sec.gov. With a little digging you will find it.
My last post was 7:39 PM and I opened it by saying “Mr. Cassel, dance your dance…”
No response.
At 8:01, 22 minutes later an anonymous poster says, “keep on dancing boys cuz the times they are a changing.” And he also used the term “forensic accounting” in the same post.
I never believed Mr. Cassel posted anonymously.
Now? I’m not so sure.
Can I have a show of hands? How many of you understand the meaning of “forensic accounting” and could use it intelligently in a sentence?
And remember, it’s sunshine week, so we really need to answer this.
I don’t post anonymously. Are you suggesting that there aren’t other people in this town who understand forensic accounting in the days of AIG, Madoff and Enron. Just pick up the paper. It is all over. You are belittling the intelligence of this town by even suggesting that.
There is no way I would write that post because there is an inaccuracy. They didn’t put out an RFP to tear down the theatre, just the marquee. But I didn’t catch any other inaccuracies.
I’m not commenting on anyone’s intelligence… and I find it difficutlt to comprehend why you would post anonymously BUT I’m a 50 year old CPA and I never heard the term forensic audit until maybe 1990… Despite your protestations and the current financial crisis, I don’t believe the general public has worked this term into it’s everyday vocabulary AND THEN to use a dance metaphor as I had just used? C’mon.
Oh before I leave to go watch 24… It’s Sunshine Week and you still have not answered the two questions I posted for you at 5:30 PM this evening.
We have something in common. It is commercial time on 24. Great show.
If they had private discussions about any township business, they have broken the law. And that is my final answer.
And if you are CPA, you are interested in the facts, I assume. I will provide you with source documents of the problems I have uncovered and you can make up your own mind. Just contact me.
I asked two questions… direct questions. Two direct questions about a specific event. These aren’t trick questions. I’m not asking because I don’t the answer. I do.
I’ve laid out an opportunity for you to say the commissioners did or did not comply with OPRA in a spefic circumstance.
You’re evading the answer.
You either want an open discussion or you want to lob bombs.
Yes I am a CPA but that doesn’t make me more interested in uncovering the facts than those who aren’t.
If you have something to offer, post it.
I read the Retrospect Article… yeah, it’s detailed, but it’s not a substitute for the complaint. It’s Sunshine Week. Post it.
I told you to contact me. You won’t. I am not anonymous like you. Sorry, if you are not interested in the source documents and are dismissing the Retrospect’s coverage where all the source documents were provided, then I don’t need to justify anything to you. How would you feel if you were threatened by a lawsuit for stating the truth? You don’t respond to that. Because there is no defense.
Are you trying to corner me into saying something on the blog, like Klineburger did during the meeting when he tried to put words in my mouth about the days he billed for over 24 hours on his bills? If you did that, what would your clients say? Again, the incorrect bills are available to you if you just contact me. Or better yet, go and OPRA them yourself. You are just interested in discrediting me, not in the truth. You are so transparent.
This does make for some good blogging.
Wow!I recieved my Haddon Press today: my tax dollar at work . I read Randy’s comments on what was has been offered to the Sulocks. His Dy-Dee article makes it sound like the Sulocks have not been receptive to the Township’s offers and are ‘holding back ‘the progress that the Town center represents. His options in the article are very loosely defined and of course; include quoting big dollars amounts …which to the resident not informed about this project or Business in general ; might make them sound greedy ..
I would be outraged if I were the Sulocks!
The Sulocks have owned that building for over 40 years : They have paid taxs to this town for over 40 years. Doesn’t that earn them some loyality from their fellow taxpayer and Business owner ? Or even their mayor ; Randy ?
Has anyone in this town seen a written offer or heard at an open forum an offer from this town to the Sullocks that define what is being offered and heard the Sullocks define what would be comfortable ( and we are not talking money here ) for them …The location on Haddon twp is prime Real Estate ; No Business person in their right mind and in this ecomony would walk away from a location like this when the building is owned and paid for.
Why would they want to ‘buy’ or ‘lease’ a property? Why would they want to disrupt their Business ? What is the town doing to mitagate these issues ?
Randy certainely does not offer anything on these points.
Is Randy’s intent to affect thir livihood by publishing these comments without a place for them to refute what he is saying…
I am feeling the possibility of more of my hard earned tax dollars being spent defending this very stupid behavior ….in yet another Haddon twp law suit …
It’s 10:06… past my bedtime… I’ll address your post in the AM
You don’t need to respond on the blog. Just send me your email address and I will send you the source documents. You can make up your own mind. Why won’t you do that? LOL. You crack me up.
st. evelyn is a funny one.
it complains bout misquotes then says “forensic accouting” when term “forensic audit” was the actual quote.
“forensic audit” is all over the news past 5 years.
randy/john/paul/st evelyn would like to think only critic is cassel. wrong. and give the people credit for being educated.
to play your game why don’t you post where you got your CPA in the next 2 hours???
stop throwing up red herrings to hijack the discussion by the people for the people. no egg timers on the internet. if you don’t want to discuss then go elsewhere — those of us interested in the town and the dirty deeds of the government will get along just fine without you.
no egg timer on the internet and you aren’t gonna keep the people quiet. nice try. game’s up fellas.
save your questions for meet the candidate night folks. randy teague and paul dougherty and john foley will have to answer them sooner or later.
let me get this right. randy made sulock an offer and since sulock refused they will take his property anyway? how is that an offer????
i hope next commissioners “offer” randy 2 bucks for his house and then take it with emminent domain when randy refuses the “offer.”
please
randy teague you are an embarassment to this town. shame on you for how you treat the real working citizens.
Wow: Will you be giving a point by point description of what has been offered to address the concerns and valid issues of the Sulocks? Were you present at any sit down conference between the township officals and the Property Owner /tenant?
Was there even a face to face conference between the present township officials and the Property Onwer/tenant that was open to the public ?
Somehow: I think not.
But still;I am looking forward to reading your blog.Just so you are prepared , I like hard cold facts; verifiable stuff.
By the way :I am a nobody in this town. Just a taxpayer …
you dont get it
doesn’t matter what the “offer” was. Sulock has a right to refuse any offer because it is HIS property.
the argument that ‘oh it was a great offer and he refused it so lets take it by force’ is just plain wrong.
you can’t take sulocks property to give to a private business just because you want to line the pockets of fieldstone.
doesn’t matter what the offer was. if you are saying the offer was too good for sulock to refuse then an ‘offer you can’t refuse’ isn’t really an offer is it?
hello earth to randyjohnpaul this is america we are living in.
Commissioners bragging that all of the properties (except Sulock’s) were obtained by Fieldstone “voluntarily” is such a mischaracterization of the truth.
Property owners were pressured, some who sued to keep their property gave up when they ran out of money, another was aggresively harassed into an early grave (Pat Fritzsche of Pat’s Tavern), and others were caused a great deal of heartache and stress in being forced out of their properties.
The forced taking of private property for private redevelopers, know as “eminent domain abuse,” is an evil and unjustified practice, and an abuse of government power.
It has no place in Haddon Township.
NO to eminent domain abuse.
Leave the Sulocks alone.
well said
randy ‘i’ll make you an offer you can’t refuse teague’ isnt fooling anyone anymore no matter how many cute names he posts with
In the coming days I will be trasferring the blog to wordpress. Of course, once it is up and running I will notify you.
It appears that this blog allows anon posters to enter their email address and follow ups will be sent.
I am still reseaching the site but will probably transfer by Friday.
Any questions, you can email me or post and I will try to answer them.
You can visit the website
haddontwp.wordpress.com
This way you will become familiar with the site when the transfer occurs. You may also post comments.
“I told you to contact me. You won’t.”
Sunshine is the best disenfectant. If you have something of value, post it for EVERYONE to see
“I am not anonymous like you.”
I am anonymous. It’s deliberate. I know it’s frustrating for you because you’re forced to DEAL WITH THE QUESTION and not the person asking the question.
“Sorry, if you are not interested in the source documents and are dismissing the Retrospect’s coverage where all the source documents were provided,…”
I’m interested in an answer to the two direct questions I asked you at 5:30 PM yesterday. YOU want to create a diversion to the questions by raising the issue of lawsuit. You want to talk about the lawsuit? Fine, Post the complaint. Showing it to The Retrospective and talking to their reporter is hardly balanced reporting. Show us their complaint and we’ll KNOW what they said and not what you say they said… Remember! It’s Sunshine Week!
“…then I don’t need to justify anything to you.”
No, you don’t have to justify anything to anyone, but the more you refuse the opportunity to support your OPINION, the more evidence you compile that you, sir, are bomb throwing fraud.
“How would you feel if you were threatened by a lawsuit for stating the truth?”
THREAT? of a lawsuit? You weren’t even sued? All this bluster about a threat?
I have a standard response to the THREAT of lawsuit… return the letter to the sender with a small tube of vaseline and a clear set of instruction where he can shove his letter. Try it. It’s very liberating.
“You don’t respond to that.”
I just did
“Because there is no defense.”
To a threat? Please.
“Are you trying to corner me into saying something on the blog, like Klineburger did during the meeting when he tried to put words in my mouth about the days he billed for over 24 hours on his bills?”
One more time… It’s sunshine week… I’m trying to get an answer to two direct questions I asked yesterday at 5:30PM
“If you did that, what would your clients say?”
Although I am a CPA, I, like 55% of all licensed CPAs in NJ, do not practice in Public Accounting… and I have no idea what that has to do with you not answering two questions.
“Again, the incorrect bills are available to you if you just contact me. Or better yet, go and OPRA them yourself.”
OK… so now we’ve moved from the SLAPP Lawsuit (that’s not a lawsuit) and moved on to incorrect invoices? Mr. Cassel… one bomb at a time… ANSWER THE TWO QUESTIONS! They’re “yes” or “no” answers… You’ve had all night to study.
“You are just interested in discrediting me, not in the truth.”
You’re doing a fine job all by your lonesome.
“You are so transparent.”
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
At 6:52 St. Evelyn said “I don’t like bullies”.
Kathy – you are right about the stress involved. You are spot on. Other than Pat, Len Rudiger is another person who the township bullied into selling. That’s right. Bullied. They threatened and threatened until he had no choice but to sell. It wasn’t voluntary in any way. I met him a couple of times at Brewer’s Pub and he was a defeated soul. This is one of the legacies of our current administration. Thank you Randy for writing this “epitaph” to remind of the conversations I had with Len and also remind me why it is equally important to stand up for the underdog.
The following comes from “Township OKs Property Buys in DyDee Zone” a Feb 25, 2005 article published in The Retrospective…
“According to the redevelopment contract between the township and Fieldstone, the township is now obligated to purchase the properties in the zone. In cases where property owners do not agree to sell, the township can use its eminent domain power to forcibly buy property.”
Is that correct? The Township is obligated by contract to acquire property by purchase or eminent domain?
Just askin.
By the way, there is no way to publish the documents on here. So your points are moot. That is why I offered to send them to you in PDF. Or you could OPRA them. Show me where to post them, and I will happily do that for all to see. In fact that would be rather liberating. I am all for it, if you, the all knowing, can show me how. It will just prove everything I say is accurate. I am 100% for Sunshine. That is obvious.
Relating to the threatened lawsuit, that is exactly what I did, but I also made sure that the entire community knew what was going on. Is there something wrong with that. Again, give me a place to post, and I will post their letter. The fact that this was done by the law partner of your solicitor, is unconscionable. Do you agree? I would like an answer. It is a question of ethics, a trait that CPA’s take very seriously. Do you think it is ethically proper for the Commissioners to sit by idly while the law partner of the township solicitor threatens a resident for publishing facts surrounding campaign contributions from appointments.
You didn’t respond to my question about billing more than 24 hours in a day from a professional. Would you say that the bill was wrong? I would like an answer to that.
Here are the answers:
Yes or no, regarding the Theater Marquee, were the commissioners obligated to hold an open public meeting?
Since the Marquee at the theatre is a public matter subject to an existing contract to Pang, yes they were in fact obligated to discuss it during a public meeting prior to obligating public funds for any activities.
Again, yes or no, if they were obligated and did not hold an open public meeting, did they break the law?
Only if two of the public officials discussed it in private. It is not a yes or no question.
Any reasonable person would believe that prior to even suggesting removing the marquee, the commissioners would have a public discussion. This is the most visible redevelopment site in town and it is really important that the sun shines through. If one of the commissioners took it solely upon himself to have this removed, we have serious other governmental issues in this town. The main problem is that in the 2 years that they have been there, there has never been one dissention on any vote. Every vote has been unanimous. There are no checks and balances, coupled with documented secret meetings.
I would like your take on the February 3rd Secret meeting as well. I provided links to the documents. Do you believe it is proper for our commissioner to have a secret budget meeting with the department heads in violation of the OPMA?
I have answered your questions.
By the way, Happy St. Patrick’s Day!
Anonymous wrote, “st. evelyn is a funny one. it complains bout misquotes then says “forensic accouting” when term “forensic audit” was the actual quote.”
Great catch… Mr. Cassel wrote “forensic audit” and I misquoted it in my post and called it “forensic accounting.”
My Bad. Mea Culpa
Here’s the difference between Mr. Cassel and I… I just acknowledged my mistake. We’re still waiting for him to acknowledge his misstatement.
I cannot answer your question because I don’t have a copy of the actual Fieldstone contract. I have asked the commissioner to post it on the township website on more than one occasion in the spirit of Sunshine. The mayor has absolutely refused. Have you reviewed it or are you depending on a quote from a newspaper rather than the actual legal document. The article is 4 years old. Has eminent domain law evolved in our state? Yes. You obviously have more pull than me so maybe through your Sunshine efforts, you can get them to do it.
This is the argument that Randy and Paul made during the election. It is flawed. The state law uses a “blighted” standard. Sulock’s property is not blighted. If it isn’t, how can a contract obligate someone to violate a state law?
Do you have a copy of the Sulock lawsuit? Maybe you would also like to post that up also in the name of Sunshine?
You haven’t responded to my 3 specific questions. I am waiting. I answered yours. What’s the problem? I guess the commissioner(s) who is feeding this stuff to you (unless you are in fact a commissioner), must be in a meeting.
By the way, thank you for bringing the blog back on topic. Eminent domain abuse is clearly a huge issue and anything we can say to bring clarity to it, is fantastic.
If you want to post a document, here’s a link that will show you how:
http://tinyurl.com/c29y99
You may want to wait until this blog transitions to wordpress… I expect they have a different way to post docs.
Tommy is happy for bringing the blog back on topic.
Said differently “Thank you for taking the attention off of me.” He’s off the hook again.
Exactly the point. I am not the issue. The commissioners and their actions are. This is the proverbial “Shoot the messenger”. Everyone objective can see that.
You haven’t answered my 3 questions. Why?
The link only relates to google docs and spreadsheets, not acrobat docs. I did a help search without any results showing up. I can email them to you to avoid this mishegas. And you profess sunshine. No one has any reason to believe who you are. Say whatever you want, but everyone sees right through it.
“Have you reviewed it or are you depending on a quote from a newspaper rather than the actual legal document.”
That’s a very interesting response… you expect someone to rely on The Retrospect’s reporting of threatened lawsuit in lieu of the actual letter, but in the case of the DyDee Development, we need to see the contract… Do you see the flip-flop?
For the record, I’ve never seen the contract. I saw the article for the first time this morning and it makes me wonder, 1) Is there a contract and 2) Does it obligate the Townwhip to acquire property through purchase or eminient domain.
“The article is 4 years old.”
So what? The age of the article does not dilute the legitimacy of the questions
“Has eminent domain law evolved in our state? Yes.”
I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t know, but so what?
“You obviously have more pull than me…”
Really? How’s that?
“so maybe through your Sunshine efforts, you can get them to do it.”
If you’ve not been able to get it, I sure won’t be able to get it. I don’t know Kathy Hogan, but she’s passionate about this issue (which is fine) and I think (honest to g-d, I don’t know) she was a commissioner when the contract was originally signed (If I’m wrong, tell me and I’ll acknowledge the error)… if I’m correct, didn’t she have access to the contract? Could she confirm my two questions? I’m not looking for a “gotcha” answer, I just want to know.
“This is the argument that Randy and Paul made during the election. It is flawed. The state law uses a “blighted” standard.”
I’m not a lawyer so I can’t opine upon someone’s arguement over a document I’ve not read. Come to think of it, you’re not a lawyer either. How do you make the argument, that their argument is flawed if you’ve never seen the contract.
“Sulock’s property is not blighted. If it isn’t, how can a contract obligate someone to violate a state law?”
Like I’ve said, I’m not a lawyer, I’ve not seen the contract and I don’t know how state law applies here, but I can read and here are two quotes from a Jan 12, 2007 Retrospective article titled, “Haddon Twp. Clears DyDee Roadblock”
Quote 1…”Last Friday, Camden County Superior Court Judge Allan Vogelson cleared the way for Haddon Township’s DyDee redevelopment project to proceed, finding that the township redevelopment process has been conducted properly.”
Quote 2…” “An important point, I believe, was that Judge Vogelson called redevelopment in Haddon Township a fair and open process,” Baxter added”
Now, I’m reading these Retrospective articles in order and if the judge was oveerturned on appeal, I haven’t read it yet. So if you can put what I’ve read in context, I’d be grateful
“Do you have a copy of the Sulock lawsuit?”
No, I don’t
“Maybe you would also like to post that up also in the name of Sunshine?”
I can’t because I don’t have it
“You haven’t responded to my 3 specific questions. I am waiting. I answered yours. What’s the problem? I guess the commissioner(s) who is feeding this stuff to you (unless you are in fact a commissioner), must be in a meeting.”
Yes, you answered my questions…FIFTEEN AND HALF HOURS AFTER I ASKED. And because 1) I form my own answers on my own time and 2) do so without benefit of the Commissioners, their “cronies” or their “insiders” and 3) I’m not willing to lob a bomb… I’ll answer your questions when I can do so completely… but I will answer.
“By the way, thank you for bringing the blog back on topic. Eminent domain abuse is clearly a huge issue and anything we can say to bring clarity to it, is fantastic.”
If I think it’s abuse, I’ll say so.
Remember Tom—Hogan signed the Contract to use Eminent Domain against Sulock
And because you will not talk about that both of you are frauds
Before I can answer, I want to be sure I got the questions right
Are these the three questions you want answered:
#1
Do you think it is ethically proper for the Commissioners to sit by idly while the law partner of the township solicitor threatens a resident for publishing facts surrounding campaign contributions from appointments.
#2
The fact that this was done by the law partner of your solicitor, is unconscionable. Do you agree? I would like an answer
#3
Do you believe it is proper for our commissioner to have a secret budget meeting with the department heads in violation of the OPMA?
I just set up an Acrobat account. Thank you for suggesting this. Now I can post whatever I want. And put links on the blog.
Here is the Klineburger bills that show the illegal meetings with multiple commissioners. They also show several days where he billed more than 24 hours during the day.
https://share.acrobat.com/adc/document.do?docid=9f9d3444-6ec6-48d9-90bc-98c5179e0027
Now you can comment on these?
And yes those are the 3 other questions. All the information relating to the secret budget meeting is on the prior blog.
Mr. Cassel wrote, “Here is the Klineburger bills that show the illegal meetings with multiple commissioners. They also show several days where he billed more than 24 hours during the day.”
First, try tinyurl.com; it’s free. I had to copy and paste your url 3 times.
Second, it’s 28 pages… Where’s the beef? If you know which days are wrong, say so… I got a full time job, I don’t need another.
And if you want my comments, let’s understand that’s a fourth question you’ve asked in less time you took to answer two “yes” or “no questions I asked.
Incidently, I’m not done the marquee.
Now that I know your 3 questions, I’ll put an answer together
Oh, one other thing… while I’m working on my responses for you, could you please answer S. Humphrey’s post… Ya know it is Sunshine Week.
I will be trying to change over the website tonight.
haddontwp.wordpress.com
I am hoping to transfer everything over. The website says we can do that so I will keep my fingers crossed that it does work.
Sunshine is a beautiful thing.
I have a full time job too. That’s a cool trick on tinyurl and appreciate the trick. I will try it. I just happen to be home sick today. Going forward, I will not be responding during the day except very sporadically. We all have to have lives off of here.
I answered your question about the Marquee. The citizens stopped its premature dismantling. It is a non issue at this point unless they try it again. At this point, I answered your questions, and am done with that topic. I was 100% clear in my answers.
Here are the dates of the meetings that violated OPMA –
(1) January 21, 2008 for 2.5 hours; (2) on February 19, 2008 for 2.6 hours; (3) on February 21, 2008 for 3.2 hours; (4) on March 14, 2008 for 1.7 hours; (5) on May 21, 2008 for four hours; and (6) on June 19, 2008 for four hours.
Additionally, there was Feb 3rd, 2009. Just look at the prior blog post where I outed that fiasco.
Look at the billings on April 7th (31.65 hours) and June 24th (33.35 hours). June 24th included a meeting at 8PM so in fact most of the work had to be completed prior. What makes me laugh is that one of commissioners went to the solicitor’s office to audit his system. I didn’t realize that it is his expertise but appreciate his effort in this. Ideally, when something like this is determined, the auditors should be engaged to have an independent view, not the campaign funds recipient. You are an accountant, and understand conflicts.
Most people do not appreciate how hard it is to try and understand what is really going on in a town. As citizens we are at a distinct disadvantage. However, by paying attention and asking questions, we can make our commissioners more accountable. That is my only goal.
Relating to Kathy, she already responded at 11:49 PM. I second what she said. She may answer any questions she chooses. I do know she voted against the financial agreement which really is the meat of the contract. That could have stopped Fieldstone in its tracks. But Bozo Bill Parks and Diamond Jim Broderick voted for it, so she was outvoted. I did not live here back when the original vote was taken, but I do understand that it was quite contentious and divisive.
One other point, when Kathy was a commissioner, she had a blog and regularly posted on it. Why is it that none of our current commissioners post? Are they afraid to engage us? I am not asking for an answer, just posing an obviously rhetorical question.
Public servants who DO NOT post to blogs far outnumber the ones who did post like Kathy.
This blog is not civil and a public servant should not enter into a forum like this…nothing good could come out of it. And lord knows if 2 of them met on here without publising the meeting first…there would be hell to pay!
And why Tommy Boy do you think the comissioners read this nonsense? If they are comfortable with the job they are doing do you honestly think they give 2cents what you think? They know they will hear it from you at the next meeting anyway…well for about 5 minutes!
What a cop out Tom. You know Hogan signed the Contract to use Eminent Domain against Sulock
Yes. They do read this.
And yes, any open public discourse is a good thing. Just because others don’t doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t. Clearly it is their choice. This isn’t a meeting, it is a blog. And actually, it is very civil on here in my opinion.
I hope that anyone who received the Haddon Press in the mail this week doesn’t show up at today’s caucus meeting at 7PM, the time on the calendar that they sent to EVERY resident, that I received yesterday.
And relating to the sarcastic mocking, it’s totally cool with me.
What a cop out Humphrey. You read Kathy’s post last night.
I still owe the answers to your three questions but I’m wading my way through this 28 page document…January 21, 2008 for 2.5 hours… The attorney writes “… meet with Mayor and Commissioner”
That violates OPMA because…
– two commissioners are in a room and there was no public notice?
– no minutes?
– other?
There’s an exception in OPMA that Commissioners can meet privately with their attorney if it involves litigation. The entries surrounding this meeting mention DyDee… DyDee means litigation, no?
The legislature’s intent was written in OPMA and specifically says it was not intended to apply to a public official meeting with a subordinate.
I’ve only looked at one entry… so let’s keep the discussion to one entry
The law is clear. You have to call an executive session if it isn’t going to be discussed in public. It must be done by passing a resolution in advance of the meeting, stating why it qualifies to be an executive session. Minutes must be kept. Minutes are available when the issue has been resolved.
It is all about the politicians conducting business in the “sunshine” even when an executive session is called.
That’s the law. Plain and simple.
Can anyone give input as to what happened at the Bd of Ed Meeting last night?
Looking good Jen. congrats on the new blog. It sure has been quiet since my last post.
Hey St. Eve. I am waiting for your response to my three questions.
And while you are at it, do you believe that if the commissioners violated OPMA? You have the solicitor’s bill. You have read the law. Well?
What about the number of hours billed in one day? Any thoughts?
By the way, Dydee is the redevelopment project, not litigation. Litigation would include a specific lawsuit or potential lawsuit.
Your questions are followed by my answers
#1 – “Do you think it is ethically proper for the Commissioners to sit by idly while the law partner of the township solicitor threatens a resident for publishing facts surrounding campaign contributions from appointments.”
I don’t have the Letter of Representation you received from an attorney that states he represents Mr. Klineburger’s partner. You haven’t posted it although you do have the technology to do so. I’ll work from my memory of what I read yesterday….
You made a written post to a newspaper website that was critical of Mr. Klineburger and his partner. I never read the post.
Mr. Klineburger’s partner took exception to your remark, hired an attorney, alleged he suffered Personal Injury and directed his attorney to make a demand upon you.
If that’s correct, you should check your homeowner and personal umbrella insurance company and ask if you have coverage for “Personal Injury” (insult, slander and libel). If you have it, present them a copy of the letter and file a claim. They should pay your defense and a settlement if one develops.
There is no ethical question here. You made a statement that was or was not libelous. A target of that statement says he suffered personal injury and has made a demand upon you comensurate to the damage he believes he suffered. You deny the allegation.
The courts are full of cases like these… personal injuries like this, breeches in contracts, auto accidents, slip falls, copyright infringements… the list goes on and on and they all have the same common denominator…”he did it” followed “no I didn’t”.
You wrote the post by yourself… the commissioners didn’t help you… they have no obligation to help you now. In fact I would say they have constitution duty as members of an executive and or legislative branch of the government to butt out and not interfere with the judicial branch of goverment.
Maybe not the answer you want to hear, but that’s my answer
#2 – “The fact that this was done by the law partner of your solicitor, is unconscionable. Do you agree? I would like an answer”
No, I would not agree. Who did it is not an issue. The only issue is, did you or did you not libel him. He says you did. You say you didn’t.
Incidently, he’s not my solicitor.
#3 – “Do you believe it is proper for our commissioner to have a secret budget meeting with the department heads in violation of the OPMA?”
According to OPMA, an individual commissioner can meet with subordinate department heads and that meeting is exempt from OPMA requirements.
When TWO or more commissioners meet to DISCUSS TOWNSHIP BUSINESS, OPMA applies.
The single case I looked at, 2.5 hours on 1/21/08, APPEARS to be a violation. I have not looked at the rest but for the sake of time, I’ll stipulate they all APPEAR to be violations of OPMA.
OPMA offeres a remedy. You have 45 days (I’ll stipulate to the day of discovery) to report the violation to the County Prosecutor or file a lawsuit in Superior Court.
If you go to the Prosecutor, I think he will, for the moment, ignore corruption in the city of Camden, rising gang violence, violence against women and children, drug violence and petty crimes associated with drug violence…. he’ll ignore all of it, for a moment , while he takes your hands firmly in his, gazes deep into your eyes and says…
“Mr. Cassel, are you f’n kidding me?”
Personally, I’d go the Superior Court route… but be forwarned… the court’s docket is a little on the full side. Auto accident cases generally take 7 years before they see the inside of a court room what with depositions and gathering expert testimony… maybe they’ll fast track your complaint.
Look on the bright side… by the time your complaint gets heard, Mr. Klineburger may become bored with municipal law and move on to something more exciting… but then he just may stick around for the chance to HAMMER you in court… and that’s when it will happen… You’ll get to meet ME! Because right after the balif calls your name and just as you lift your butt off that chair, you’ll turn your head a little to the left to look in the gallery and see who just whipered…
“Mr. Cassel, I told you this would happen”
I am glad to see that you are coming around to my side. You have agreed from the bill that there is an OPMA violation. There are 4 more entries just like it. In fact, all 3 commissioners met on 2/3/09 and Mr. Klineburger was also in attendance at 6:20 PM in a meeting that was published as executive only. According to your post, they may only meet separately. From that, I conclude the you would agree that they met in violation of OPMA.
You do not have to explain to me what my legal alternatives are. In fact, I am considering all of my alternatives. You do not have a clear understanding of how justice works relating to cases such as this.
Please explain your one comment – “He is not my solicitor”. Are you not a resident of Haddon Township? If not, what is your interest in our town?
And please do tell, if you believe that Mr. Klineburger will in fact hammer me in court, you yourself have stated that he engaged in violating OPMA. Under what basis? Are you a libel attorney? Your statement “I’ll stipulate to the date of discovery” is a sentence only an attorney would make, not an industry based CPA. Your discussion of the personal insurance nuances is something only a libel attorney would know.
And the days where he billed the town more than 24 hours? Isn’t that a little unusual? I am only saying what the bills say. Nothing more. Now the document that Mr. Klineburger submitted to the town, over redacted, and has made numerous excuses and suggested changes to has been posted in black and white for all to see. It is a public document.
Here is my theory and opinion. I may be right or wrong. To all our readers, you see what our commissioners and solicitor me be trying to do to discredit me. It appears that Mr. Klineburger has hired an attorney to try get me to say things on the blog that will allow me to be sued for slander or to discredit me. Although St. Evelyn says he doesn’t know him, he has not come clean in any way or form so I am not sure I believe him. All of his posts are prepared in careful legal prose. And the final paragraph, says it all. He says Mr. Klineburger wants to HAMMER me in court. Of course he does, he is a litigator; that is what he does for a living. These types of behaviors are way worse than anything done under the Park administration.
Long live the BLOG!
Mr. Cassel, The paranoia you exhibit could be treated with medication… I’d explain, but then you’d accuse me of being the Surgeon General.
“I am glad to see that you are coming around to my side.”
Not quite. You write about their foibles as if you’ve just caught Mr. Green in the parlor with a bloody knife. I, on the other hand, acknowledged that in the one single case I looked at there appears, absent any explanation, a potential violation of OPMA.
“You have agreed from the bill that there is an OPMA violation.”
No, I said there appears to be a violation.
“There are 4 more entries just like it. In fact, all 3 commissioners met on 2/3/09 and Mr. Klineburger was also in attendance at 6:20 PM in a meeting that was published as executive only. According to your post, they may only meet separately. From that, I conclude the you would agree that they met in violation of OPMA.”
No, I did not agree. I said there is evidence to suggest that OPMA may have been violated…. The thing about laws? You and I are not judges… we don’t get to decide, they do.
“You do not have to explain to me what my legal alternatives are. In fact, I am considering all of my alternatives. You do not have a clear understanding of how justice works relating to cases such as this.”
I’m sure I don’t have to explain, but OPMA says there are two alternatives. Do I have clear understanding? Uh, no. But I do understand math… and 5 is not a big number. It’s sloppy… I’ll give ya that and if Commissioners are reading, I’ll tell ya this… Yesterday I checked with an Atlantic County attorney who specializes in Municipal law (65% of his practice) and he said if there’s a quorum, OPMA likely applies. (He won’t enter a bar after a town meeting if his presence might constitute a quorum)
“Please explain your one comment – “He is not my solicitor”. Are you not a resident of Haddon Township? If not, what is your interest in our town?”
Please, we’ve gone over this… but I’ll do it one more time… This time I’ll type slowly so you can follow: your reference of Mr. Klineburger as “your solicitor” is your subliminal attempt to persuade the reader that I’m in his pocket or he’s in mine. That’s not true… I don’t know him, I’ve never met him, I’ve never spoken to him. Period. I defend him ONLY BECAUSE you attack him WITHOUT MERIT!
You want to know where I am… I dwell in the hearts and minds of the people who read your character assassinations and say, “That’s just not right” but they don’t have the time or the words necessary to take you and your ilk on.
You’ve been the uncontested fugleman (look that up in your Funk & Wagnalls) of this blog long enough.
“And please do tell, if you believe that Mr. Klineburger will in fact hammer me in court, you yourself have stated that he engaged in violating OPMA. Under what basis?”
I should know how he’ll argue a case that has not even been presented? I have no idea, but if he’s a skilled litigator, you have to admit, a cross examination could be entertaining.
“Are you a libel attorney?”
Nope… but just FYI, the correct term is Personal Injury Attorney… and I’m not one of those either.
“Your statement “I’ll stipulate to the date of discovery” is a sentence only an attorney would make, not an industry based CPA. Your discussion of the personal insurance nuances is something only a libel attorney would know.”
I understand Latin too… Doesn’t make me a pharmacist. I tried to work “debit” and “credit” into the converssation but it just didn’t fit. BTW, have you called your insurance agent yet? A delay in reporting could jeopardize coverage… I’m not kidding.
“And the days where he billed the town more than 24 hours? Isn’t that a little unusual? I am only saying what the bills say. Nothing more.”
You said a commissioner met the solicitor in the solicitor’s office… Well, what’s the explanation?
“Here is my theory and opinion.”
This should be good…
“I may be right or wrong.”
Really? That’s insightful. That’s the way it works for most of us
“To all our readers, you see what our commissioners and solicitor me be trying to do to discredit me.”
If you’re referring to me (St. Evelyn), they’re not doing a damn thing. This is all me, baby!
“It appears that Mr. Klineburger has hired an attorney to try get me to say things on the blog that will allow me to be sued for slander or to discredit me.”
A) I’ve never talked to him, B) He has not hired me… I’m not available for hire, C) I’m not an attorney (I did get 6 credits in Business Law so I could sit for the CPA exam… does that count?), D) Uh, no… you’re doin fine all by yourself. E) not that it matters, but slander is spoken, libel is written… there’s a difference, F) When I read this part, I started thinking, PARANOID!
“Although St. Evelyn says he doesn’t know him,”
And I don’t
“he has not come clean in any way or form so I am not sure I believe him.”
In other words, “I am an unarmed combatant in the battlefield of ideas and since I can’t argue on the merits of the idea, I need to know who St. Evelyn is and where St. Evelyn is so I can discredit St Evelyn and not have to deal with ideas…” of course, that’s just St. Evelyn’s opinion.
“All of his posts are prepared in careful legal prose.”
Holy legal briefs, Batman!!! (I told you not to write, “stipulate”)… Step back, Robin! His head might explode when I write, “square on point!” or “factually distinguishable!!”.
“And the final paragraph, says it all. He says Mr. Klineburger wants to HAMMER me in court.”
STOP THE PRESSES!!… boys and girls! Pay attention to Brother. Mr. Cassel has just written, “Mr. Klineburger wants to HAMMER me in court.” Now let’s look at what St. Evelyn ACTUALLY wrote, “…but then he just may stick around for the chance to HAMMER you in court…” Do you see the difference Boys and Girls? Mr. Cassel wants you to believe the big bad commissioners and their dark knight of an attorney are colluding to attack his integrity. That’s a perfect example of how he will SAY ANYTHING to assinate the good name of someone just workin for a living… someone just like you, dear reader… Think about that.
“Of course he does, he is a litigator; that is what he does for a living.”
I feel like I need a shower just reading that… G-d forbid you’re ever injured (and I mean that) call some CPAs and see what they can do for you.
“These types of behaviors are way worse than anything done under the Park administration.”
I wouldn’t know… I haven’t been reading the Blog that long.
You say you have never had any contact with the solicitor. But have you had any contact or conversations with our commissioners? You have never disclosed that that I can remember. Yes or no. Inquiring minds want to know.
St. Evelyn,
YOU ARE FABULOUS!
I saw a lot of folks in town last night in the taproom. Tom, don’t worry, the administration stayed home, they can’t socialize together or it would appear as a meeting. You are most admired and have been following the blog. We don’t know who you are, but your doing a great job. Thank You.
I’ve met two commissioners, we’ve shaken hands. If I said I’m so and so… they’d squint their eyes and say, “Really?, How ya doin?
I know a third commissioner well enough that he’d take my call… but he’d probably take your call too. He’s not all that discriminating about phone calls… I don’t mean anything against you…. It’s just he’s a telemarketer’s dream.
I’ve also met Kathy Hogan, though she would have absolutely no clue who I am
I’m not a vendor to the town, I’ve never been a vendor to the town, I don’t want to be a vendor to the town.
I’ve never made a political contribution to any party and my last colonoscopy was in April, 2003.
If it’s of any benefit, I’m circumsised, baptized, overweight, undersexed, father of two pre-teen smart asses.
And I’m still not a lawyer
Obviously you are teaching your preteens well. Do you live in the town?
Would you like my picture and resume?… C’mon Mr. Cassel… a little mystery in life is a good thing.
Think of me as a force of goodness.
I filed the lawsuit yesterday. You see, a little mystery in life is a good thing. Think of ME as the force of goodness.
Post your copy of the filed complaint. You have the technology.
It should make great reading.
On advice of counsel, no. We will leave it to the professionals. You are right. I do have the techology. Perhaps instead of focusing on this you can make comments related to some of the other topics.
It is available at the Superior Court. Or call the commissionersand get a copy and post it yourself, Sorry. I am spending the day with my son and won’t be on the computer except sporadically. Good luck.
“On advice of counsel, no. We will leave it to the professionals.”
Guess Sunshine Week’s over.
“Perhaps instead of focusing on this you can make comments related to some of the other topics.”
Thank you, but I’ll train my focus where I want.
“It is available at the Superior Court.”
I’ll wait and read about it in The Retrospect.
“Or call the commissioners and get a copy and post it yourself”
I get a Christmas card from one commissioner and you extrapolate I have him on speed dial? Do you see Boogey Men everywhere you go?
I hope you enjoy your day with your son.
I leave a response each time I like a post
on a blog or if I have something to valuable to contribute to the discussion.
Usually it is caused by the fire displayed in the article I browsed.
And after this post REDEVELOPMENT IN HADDON
TOWNSHIP | Twp of Haddon. I was actually excited enough to post a thought 🙂 I
do have a few questions for you if it’s allright. Is it simply me or does it look like a few of these remarks look as if they are written by brain dead individuals? 😛 And, if you are posting at additional sites, I would like to keep up with you. Could you list the complete urls of all your shared sites like your twitter feed, Facebook page or linkedin profile?