| Author | Message | ||
     IMHO Citizen Username: Imho Post Number: 2 Registered: 3-2006 |
1. Based on the sentiments expressed by so many tonight, will the trustees NOW reconsider their decision vis a vis the Tony Smith sculpture? I believe one of the trustees indicated that they would do so pending input from the attendees... 2. Did I hear correctly? Does Mr. Gross hold MULTIPLE positions in the town...among them CFO and COO? How is that possible? Does he make multiple salaries? Where are checks and balances? 3. I saw Bill Calabrese excuse himself when the questioning began about "the rug site." What exactly is the relationship between him and Mr. Sayid? 4. Finally...relating to the Beifus site....are any of the trustees working on a "Plan B?" | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3695 Registered: 5-2001  |
1) Don't count on it unless more people show up at the NEXT meeting. 2) Yes. In addition, the majority of his salary was recently "shifted" to his TENURED position (CFO). Administrator Salary 2004 $122,534-------2005 $30,368 Treasurer Salary 2004 $16,305------------2005 $5,000 CFO Salary 2004 $6,988------------------2005 $116,474 Civilian OEM Salary 2004 $5,202-----------2005 $5,416 Total: 2004 $151K------------------------2005 $157K Checks & Balances?? Lots of "Checks" (deposited) - No Balances!! 3) According to Calabrese there is a "potential future business relationship" and as a result he must recuse himself from all discussions of Sayid. 4) Mark Rosner is the only one that I know of that has stated he would move to Condemn. The rest are going to keep waiting for Plan A..... | ||
| IMHO Citizen Username: Imho Post Number: 3 Registered: 3-2006 |
It was astounding to me that so many people came forward to express their dismay about the sculpture program and the manner in which it has continued over years to move forward by the actions of the BOT. This board continues to endorse spending taxpayer money on this, despite other pressing priorities. Thanks are due the citizens who came forward tonight to speak at the podium. It is not easy to put yourself out there. They reminded the BOT's of crumbling roads and bathrooms their kids can't use in schools. Yet despite such heartfelt remarks, this Board said nothing...NOTHING from any of them. No acknowledgement whatsoever. No reconsideration. No defense of their actions. NOTHING. Clearly it was a calculated strategy. What they fail to realize is that silence is its own remark, and tells more about them than they may realize. | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 22866 Registered: 6-2001  |
I guess it's time to stage a house-to-house petition against the statue. I don't have the time, but I will volunteer at least 5 hours per week to knocking on doors for valid signatures against the project as presented. I still want a Tony Smith sculpture here, but I agree that the town has handled it miserably. They can't even develop a fricking GIFT STATUE, and we are about to allow them to tax EXISTING SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS. Someone should really put some thought into what's important and obviously none of our elected "trustees" have. | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 59 Registered: 5-2005 |
It's VERY hard to stand there and make heartfelt remarks when you feel that the people you are physically looking at are looking right through you and are just counting the seconds until you stop speaking... | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 22867 Registered: 6-2001 |
Yes, I've been there and I've done that, on more than one occasion. That's why I don't bother going to meetings anymore. But I'd LOVE to get petition signatures. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3696 Registered: 5-2001 |
IMHO, Yes and even more OUTRAGEOUS is that not only are they spending at least $250,000 of TAX DOLLARS, THERE HAS BEEN NO PUBLIC HEARING OR DIALOG about it. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 523 Registered: 6-2005 |
I felt I witnessed tonight this BOT's at their miserable worst. They deflected questions on the finance of the sculpture to Mr. Gross who was not there, as they all came down with lapsis mensis. Mr. Taylor educated us to the fact that BOT's actually have to read stuff associated with their function. Ms. Jennings gave us a lecture on corporate structure. Rosen was unbearable, and his explanation of how the scultpure was probably lumped together (i.e. buried) with other items on the bond was incredible. But amidst the silence of the night and their unwillingness to address the citizens' concerns which were laid before them, it was Calabrese who had the quote of the night: "This is not an inquisition. Now go ahead...ask your questions." It would be comedic if it wasn't so tragic. I know that I will no longer sit back. | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 85 Registered: 10-2005 |
I've heard on a few occasions that our CFO is a tenured position. What does this mean in the context of our Village government? Isn't it common for Administrators to serve at the behest of the Mayor/President barring a majority vote of the Council to the contrary, or something to that effect? Does his "tenure" extend beyond this particular administration? | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3697 Registered: 5-2001 |
JoRo - Yes. I was also amused at Calabrese & Matthews criticizing the Star Ledger article as inaccurate: http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=3133&post=569806#POST5698 06 I thought the article was fair & the reporter did a thorough job. | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 86 Registered: 10-2005 |
Sorry ... I meant CFO on second reference. (I'm confused by all the titles!) At any rate, what's the deal with the tenure? | ||
| Lizziecat Citizen Username: Lizziecat Post Number: 1129 Registered: 5-2003 |
I was nauseated by the proceedings. The Board's stonewalling of the citizens' concerns made me ill. Yes, they said, there was a bond issue passed, but they can't remember when, and they can't remember when the public comment took place, but there must have been public comment. Meanwhile, there were citizens there who had taken the time to go through the minutes of BOT meetings for years past and there WAS NO PUBLIC COMMENT to be found. There was no bond issue either. It's "buried" someplace else. Wait until John Gross comes back; he knows. Come on! And since when does a village president threaten to have a citizen arrested? The state Attorney General should investigate these guys. | ||
| IMHO Citizen Username: Imho Post Number: 4 Registered: 3-2006 |
MHD: Any insight as to the status of Irvington Ave. businesses...why are they exempt from the proposed SID (correct terminology?) that was discussed early in the meeting? | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 636 Registered: 4-2005  |
JoRo - I actually asked Mr. Gross to come address a class on campus (he did very good) but he equated the position of Village Administrator to a "Chief of Staff". I remember that because I wrote it down with 3 question marks in my pink mead notebook, lol. | ||
| John Quincy Adams Citizen Username: Randolph_agarn Post Number: 24 Registered: 3-2006  |
Sheena - I am sorry for doing this. It is not "he did very good" it is "he did very well." It was just something that my mother pressed into me at a very early age. I'm sorry, but I just had to do it. | ||
| Sheena Collum SHU Citizen Username: Sheena_collum Post Number: 637 Registered: 4-2005 |
(slowly pulls knife from heart, yet manages to recuperate) Who am I to argue with JQA? (fast fact, people referred to the toilet as the 'quincy' in his honor... it was a novelty item at the time - did you know that?) He did say "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost." (I have the poster)  Thanks for the tip and sorry for the drift. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4522 Registered: 1-2004  |
MHD- Well none until the last couple of months or so when you and a couple of others started to ask question. I give all of you who took the time to go to the BOT meeting to show there are quite a few of us who don't like what's happening. To those of you who had the guts to get up there and speak, THANK YOU for doing something I'm too chicken to do. I cannot believe the way some of our BOT members treated some of the members of our community. You don't need to yell at members of the community when you do not like what they are asking. As our elected officials you owe it to us the taxpayers of this community to have the best interest of the community in mind when making decisions, especially one that will cost more then $250,000! As a number of people, some very emotionally pointed out, they love art and would love to have the statue for our town, but not at this time. Supposedly Ms Arnet polled the majority of South Orange residents about the statue and according to her, if I remember correctly, they wanted the statue. Well, if this is the case, how come I live in one of the neighborhoods she said she polled and not one of the 25 plus random people I spoke to knew anything about the poll? How come every single person I've spoken to about this statue over the past two or so months didn't know the town was paying for it? All they knew was what had been said in the one sided slanted articles. Why is it feedback is asked about an orange several years ago (it was in the Gaslight and I think even the Snooze Wreckered) wasn't the same done for the sculpture? Why does the town have to be responsible for the balance of money Ms Arnet's foundation can't raise? If she's so sure she can arias it, why isn't she responsible? Then to trash the Star Ledger article. Why? Because it exposed the truth? How are they going to get out of this one? Too many people came prepared tonight with facts. There is no wiggle room this time. If the Ledger was so wrong with the information, how come not one member of the BOT wrote a letter demanding a retraction? I'm drawing a blank here, but there is money the state gives communities to help meet their budgets (it had to be applied by Friday, I think). Well, why would the state want to give us extra money to met our budget, when we're spending money that could be used to fix things like the library, school bathrooms, maybe even the pool, on a statue? My guess is they won't. I think some mentioned this money the state gives to communities is supposed to help offset the taxes. I agree with BETS about a door to door petition. I've been saying this for a while now. I'd be more then happy to help. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4523 Registered: 1-2004 |
MHD Who was it who had the nerve to practically yell at a resident "How long have you lived here!?" When the resident questioned past behaviour of the BOT? And I don't know if anyone else caught it but more then one of our BOT memebers were rolling their eyes when some people were speaking. | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 60 Registered: 5-2005 |
What was really incredible was that they had NO supporting documentation to hand giving dates of the public meetings when the sculpture was discussed, or line item data that the sculpture had been amalgamated into(?), or proof of this representative sampling in which the community gave their majority support of the sculpture. I am sure that they must have known that someone was going to ask them for this, and surely, it would have been a prudent move to have this information there to "head them off at the pass". Mr. Gross was unable to attend, but being such a hot potato right now, surely this would have been a priority to get this information to the trustees prior to his awful accident, or at the every least, something that one of his staff could have provided quickly in order for this meeting not to look so staged. It came across as a protest, the trustees as the protesters.. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3700 Registered: 5-2001 |
JoRo - Regarding "tenure" - start by reading this thread: http://www.southorangevillage.com/cgi-bin/show.cgi?tpc=3133&post=339775#POST3397 75 Regarding Irvington Ave businesses - I have no idea. Perhaps you can send a Privateline to Elaine Harris. JTA - It was Calabrese who questioned if the resident was living here then. SOparents - You are ABSOLUTELY correct. My spouse JUST told me that the Discussion continued AFTER Remonstrances were over and most people left. Did anyone continue watching and can summarize what transpired? Were any decisions reached? | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 61 Registered: 5-2005 |
MHD Sheena posted that she started watching around about 11pm - maybe she can help you | ||
| Stuggart Smith Citizen Username: Parkingsux Post Number: 363 Registered: 6-2005  |
Isn't that the job of the Village Clerk. She is the keeper of the records, the only problem is she didn't speak up to this matter of concern. The entire explanation by members of the BoT of not knowing was not only another lie but a continuation of public malfeasance. It's criminal. Mr Calabrese, your vision and stewardship of this town is up your •••. If after 15 years you can point to the Baghdad downtown and the continued uncontrolled rise in the tax levy as an accomplishment - you are delirious. What are people to think of your management style? And to Mr. Matthews who became heated and offered information concerning the prior redevelopment attorney and former trustee, could someone explain what he meant by failures to protect the village's interest in certain real estate deals. This is another area of review required by an outside investigation. To say it mildly, they have to be stopped. The closed door has been set ajar by a persistent villager asking the right questions. It is time for the public to step through the door and review all the questionable actions undertaken by either the BoT, Redevelopment Committee or Village President for the past eight years. There are plenty of unanswered questions that the village administration and the chair of finance has failed to answer. This game play of hide and seek must end, it's unbearable to witness. Most memorable line, Inquistion Part II - Ask your questions.... | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4526 Registered: 1-2004 |
Soparents In response to the quote below: Uh, it's not all that incredible. The reason is simple. Because there is NONE!!! >>>What was really incredible was that they had NO supporting documentation to hand giving dates of the public meetings when the sculpture was discussed, or line item data that the sculpture had been amalgamated into(?), or proof of this representative sampling in which the community gave their majority support of the sculpture.<<< | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 65 Registered: 5-2005 |
JTA | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 87 Registered: 10-2005 |
I caught the end of the meeting, but was eating and sound quality was rough, so I woudn't want to mis-quote or mis-characterize. However, a lot of ground was covered and it got quite heated. When are new videos posted? | ||
| Bailey Citizen Username: Baileymac Post Number: 199 Registered: 3-2005 |
I watched last night's meeting on TV. One of the arguments from the Trustees was that the value of the statue would appreciate over time. Will we be waiting for just the right offer to sell the thing? Or, as has been mentioned before, will our insurance premiums increase proportionately? How could they not? Has this board considered future costs for security and insurance of such a valuable piece of art? Will those costs eventually become overwhelming? | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4527 Registered: 1-2004 |
MHD Thanks! As for the SID, I got the impression, from listening to what Elaine Harris was saying, none of the businesses want this SID. I thought I heard someone ask about Irvingtson Ave being left out of the SID; and asking is it because the same person owns most of the buildings in that area. (someone please correct me if I'm mistaken) | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4528 Registered: 1-2004 |
Bailey When our wonderfult BOT members were trying to convince us of what a great deal we're getting and how much this statue is really worth, I turned to the person next to me and said 'Yeah but who's going to want to buy it from us?' I asked someone after the meeting why don't we just sell it to one of the colleges, I was told there was something in the agreement that doesn't allow us to sell it. Therefore, IMHO it isn'r going to be worth as much as our BOT wants us to believe. I have my doubts we're going to have people flocking to town to see this as the BOT wants us to believe. I don't understand how anyone can even believe the insurance premiums for the town won't increase, as the BOT wants us to believe. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 237 Registered: 1-2006 |
JTA: Me too. It was Mr. Taylor, a couple of months ago. He compared his 29 years to my 15 years in town. I am really trying to close that residency gap, one day at a time. It was more stunning incompetence last night. No no knows if the sidewalk in town, under the trestle at S.O. Ave is town property, or if the town can police it for safety purposes, such as removing the multiple dumpsters which have sprung up, mushroom like, amanita mushroom like, adjacent to the village diner. By the way, the diner is scheduled to be inspected by Jersey Transit today as final step in process to open. Wish Nick luck. Why JT has such control and the town never negotiated it from the train people is another thread, for another generation. As to our own wasteland, and without reference to the area that looks carpet bombed (apologies to T.S. Eliot), the simple question to the board: do you have a plan B if you finally "are fed up to here and can't take it anymore" with Beifus's gaming us, there was silence. Silence of the lambs leading us taxpayers to ??? jd | ||
| crabby Citizen Username: Crabbyappleton Post Number: 535 Registered: 1-2004 |
Someone said something above about getting an investigation going with the State Attorney General. That is a brilliant idea!! | ||
| dgm Citizen Username: Dgm Post Number: 290 Registered: 5-2001 |
At first I thought that there should be an investigation of the Village Father, however, that may not be necessary as he simply discredits himself under public scrutiny. | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 67 Registered: 5-2005 |
JD I thought you spoke very well last night. Valid points and valid questions.. | ||
| Soparents Citizen Username: Soparents Post Number: 68 Registered: 5-2005 |
Further to JD's point about the dumpsters.. I can't wait for the warmer weather if they are still there - flies and stench. Yum.. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 239 Registered: 1-2006 |
That is why Calabrese threatened to call the police!!! Too bad he didn't. If our leader called the police, and if they obeyed his illegal order to silence me, I would use the retirement fund settlement from the federal suit to conduct a investigation of the board bullies and their enablers. One: money. Two: investigation. My double whammy would put them in the slammy. jd | ||
| Elaine Harris Citizen Username: Elaineharris Post Number: 132 Registered: 12-2004 |
It is my understanding that the proposed SID will not cover the Irvington Avenue area, and no one on the BoT corrected me, thus by their silence they affirmed that statement. They want to hire someone to offer us services that we do not want, we do not need, and we openly oppose. They want us to pay for that person or persons by imposing a tax that will be virtually impossible to extinguish once it gets in place. We all know that taxes are like opportunistic viruses.....they just continue to grow. The only response the Board gave me was to state that my information was "false" referring to my comment that the person running the SID would be working for the BoT and hired by the BoT. They insisted the person would be working for "us." Bear in mind, there is no job description, no stated need, no defined purpose, no request from anyone in the business community for such a person, just the creation of another job, more perks, more pensions, etc. Does anyone out there understand just how difficult it is to stay in business today? Even the large chain businesses, such as supermarket chains, are facing problems, due, in part, to saturation, i.e. too many too close to each other. Vendors who provide goods to supermarkets have been noticing slower payments, and requests for discounting, all signs of problems in the retail industry. The Chamber of Commerce is unanimously against the SIDs proposal, and the last time I was updated, Main Street was also against it. I am also in communication with many independent business owners who join neither group for whatever reason and they are against it. So one must ask, why is the BoT doing this? Is it because they are desperate for money because they have egregiously mismanaged our government? Is it because they want to control the business community notwithstanding the fact that we have both an active Chamber of Commerce and Main Street? I heard Allan Rosen state, as well as others on the board state, over and over again: "SIDS is a funding vehicle." No kidding! But there is no FUN in funding. Any resident who thinks that it is fair to toss another fiscal burden on the business community is not thinking clearly. The businesses already pay more than their fair share. Who do you go to for ads, donations, journals, etc.? If the businesses have to pay more, the money otherwise given to these causes will be reduced or eliminated. Have you noticed how many businesses come and go? They are fragile and need support, not a direct attack from a hostile government. I hope the public out there reading this will understand that this is about supporting your downtown, about trying to help others survive in business. Please don't fall for the line that the businesses should carry their share of the burden. They already carry more than their share, and quite frankly, so do you. I have always been a proponent of THRIFT IN GOVERNMENT AT ALL LEVELS. If you do not accept thrift as a virtue, then woe is me and woe are we. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 4533 Registered: 1-2004 |
Joel- I remember when that exchange happened with you! I felt like saying something to him about the. I guess he thought since he's lived here 15 years longer then you he's better then you and has more of a right to say what happens in town. Well, my family has been here 15 years longer then him.  It seemed someone on the BOT tried to pass the buck about those dumpsites. A BOT member said the dumpsters were on NJ Transit Property, didn't they? | ||
| JoRo Citizen Username: Autojoe51 Post Number: 88 Registered: 10-2005 |
Joel, I was very glad you mentioned the Spanish-Revival building on Vose that was recently leveled. I am an admitted fan of architecture, but I think that our Village is going to lose more than we know if we continue to bulldoze historic properties in the name of condo-progress. As you rightly pointed out, communities are making use of classic buildings in increasingly innovative ways. It's a trend, people recognize their worth and desire them, and meanwhile South Orange is driving the other way, trying to turn our town into ... a facsimile of an historic town? I don't know when the time to comment on this building occurred, but I hope we can prevent such mistakes with timely campaigning in the future. JoRo | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro Post Number: 2687 Registered: 5-2004  |
The quicktime version of the proceedings is online now. The windows media version is usually up in a couple of hours. | ||
| Pdg Citizen Username: Pdg Post Number: 713 Registered: 5-2004  |
I just called the Village IT guys and was told the video of last night's meeting will be available between 1 hours from now and afternoon today. I stayed after most people had left the meeting last night and it would be worth viewing to see the end. Bill Calabrese made a very long speech about the history of the redevelopment of South Orange and something about the BOT's wonderful vision of South Orange's future - that it is like a large puzzle, of which the TS Sculpture is just one tiny piece. (It is clear that he believes every single word he says - I bet more than one trustee wished he'd stop talking.) Among other things, he carefully explained that the CDBG grant was applied for and when it was declined for use for the sculpture, they found they would be able to apply it to the SOPAC project. SO - they decided to take $250,000 of the bonded capital intended FOR SOPAC and use it for the sculpture and replace it with the "EXTRA" $250,000 from the CDBG grant. So - my interpretation of his explanation is that is there will be no public record of any discussion or voting for a bond measure that included specifically the TS Sculpture, and apparently B.C. is very aware of that! They basically found a way to use CDBG grant money for the sculpture, against the wishes of HUD. They treat this CDBG money as if it is found money. The bottom line is, if SOPAC would qualify for CDBG money - WHY ON EARTH DIDN'T THEY APPLY FOR IT IN THE FIRST PLACE and vote to ISSUE FEWER BONDS? The CDBG money SHOULD be applied to SOPAC, but to reduce the SOPAC debt, NOT to free-up debt intended for SOPAC for other spending on luxury items! In my opinion, they are trying to say that the sculpture is part of an entrance plaza to SOPAC, to justify using SOPAC debt for its installation. Also of interest at the end of the meeting: Two residents went to the podium for a second time. The first gentleman, because Calabrese was sort of lecturing directly to him and he felt a need to reply since Calabrese singled him out as a newcomer and apparently was trying to give him a history lesson to see these issues within a prettier context. His point was that they moved here, I think he said 4 years ago, and they moved b/c they believed the promises of "coming soon" and redevelopment etc. and were excited to get into an up and coming town. Now, they are disappointed and live near the "pit" that is on Vose, etc. etc. Clearly Calabrese was unable to convince him to remain optimistic about the BOT's vision. The second resident spoke about the apparently conflicting "vision" of less than a decade ago - specifically the already improved spot where the gazebo and fountain were installed with tax dollars. Clearly someone had a very different "vision" given that the architecture of the gazebo and slate roof seem to blend, rather than conflict and contrast with the firehouse and train station as the sculpture will. She also brought up a point made on another thread, which is that the fast-tracked RE-improvement of that same spot could be a large slap in the face to our demoralized, brave fire-fighters who have been living in rented trailers for years while the too-long firehouse renovation goes on and on. Why are we incurring 1/4 million dollars of debt, plus interest, to improve a spot for a second time when so many spots in our village need a first-time improvement? The good news is that apparently the only thing keeping the firefighters out of the firehouse is a "legal matter that can't be discussed here" (at the meeting) but that they expect the firefighters to be in the firehouse about 3 months after the sculpture is installed. (That was Matthews talking.) Frankly, by the end of the meeting the BOT did seem to be a bit contrite and regrets the process of which so many are complaining. (They all agreed that at a minimum something positive will come of this issue regarding future handling of projects.) In particular, Mark Rosner spoke very well to Mr. Calabrese and the rest of the BOT. He agreed with the gentleman who spoke about SOPAC having been done piecemeal, and before we knew it we were "in it" and couldn't go back. He completely agreed that this sculpture project was done in a similar way without looking at the total picture before we were suddenly committed. He also seemed to agree that it was clear that the public did not receive complete and accurate information about tax dollars being used and did not have any opportnity to participate in discussions PRIOR to this being committed to. THANK YOU TRUSTEE ROSNER!  And frankly, it seems we may actually have gotten through a bit to Trustees Jennings and Moore-Abrams. Once things quieted down, they seemed open to listening, nodded their heads a few times as if in agreement, and very possibly agree with some of the points made by the residents who spoke. If they are honest with themselves, I bet they'd agree that before they were sitting on the BOT they, as regular taxpayers, didn't know much about the sculpture other than it was a "gift". I have to say, I do think the BOT believes they are doing a good job and trying their best to improve S.Orange. I appreciate their service and intentions, but still believe that certain trustees are naturally more talented in their service than others. Bottom line - please take the time to watch the meeting. I was there from 8 until after 11 and it was good theater - better in person than watching from the computer by far. I hope that there will be even more presence at future meetings. | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 3704 Registered: 5-2001 |
PDG, Great post. I'm sorry I didn't stick around, but I will watch it on video today.
Unfortunately, this statement is not true: The Board agreed to include the sculpture in the application for CDBG funds and prioritized its list to apply for CDBG funds as follows: PRIORITY PROPOSED PROJECTS BUDGET REQUEST 1 Performing Arts Center construction. $250,000 Funds to be pledged for 108 Loan Program guarantee and repayment. 2 Installation, transporting, sighting, insuring $250,000 and conserving a permanent outdoor Tony Smith sculpture in the redevelopment zone in South Orange. Total $500,000 http://www.southorange.org/minutes/2002/11252002r.htm In other words, they applied for a Grant for the Sculpture AND SOPAC. The Grant for the Sculpture was DENIED. The Grant for SOPAC was approved. It appears they decided to use the Grant for the sculpture ANYWAY- against the approval of HUD. |
