| Author | Message | ||
     Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1852 Registered: 3-2003 |
Can they please get rid of phrase "value engineer ... the contract for $10.5 million" on the Village website (not the SOPAC site.) It's a fraud and a con job. | ||
| noracoombs Citizen Username: Noracoombs Post Number: 161 Registered: 8-2002 |
Re: the kitchen--I seem to recall that way back when, there were plans for catering facilities on-site, so that the space could be rented for private functions. The handicap bathroom is a stumper though--how that slipped through the cracks is beyond me. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1855 Registered: 3-2003 |
Re the kitchen: Way back, the plans were to were to use the space on the top floor for parties/receptions, but only have facilities to store and reheat food that was prepared elsewhere. I don't know how this changed over time, but there were not plans for a full-fledged kitchen. | ||
| bets Supporter Username: Bets Post Number: 23624 Registered: 6-2001  |
Anyone who is asking questions about the inception, reaction, supposition, and protestation of this project should read the archived South Orange Specific threads. Most Specifically, threads from the last election: /discus/messages/129/69343.html?1116560311 | ||
| Arjay Citizen Username: Arjay Post Number: 11 Registered: 11-2003 |
I understand the $3.6M is a loan separate from the initial funding and will be paid back from, among other things, fund-raising monies SOPAC collects. The money is NOT to cover overruns, that is, costs that have inflated from initial estimates, but to cover, in part, changes (add-ons, improvements, upgrades) to elements of the building initially planned. Some of the $3.6M will go to cover operating costs. The money was needed, I am told, because fundraising was delayed. As a S.O. taxpayer, this doesn't make the situation any easier to swallow but does shed some light on the issue of extra monies. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 725 Registered: 6-2005 |
Since when do you float a bond to cover operating costs? | ||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 656 Registered: 1-2004  |
The problem is that there is no "official" explanation of the intended use/need for these funds. We are being asked on faith that this information and agreement to repay has been conveyed to the BOT so they can properly vote other than the threat that SOPAC may not open/complete. | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 520 Registered: 2-2006 |
Since when do you borrow your way out of debt, Arjay? Fundraising has been delayed, like everything else in town. The delay is just one more sign neither SOPAC nor the BOT has their acts together. The wrecklessness of the BOT is intolerable and endangers the entire town, not only property values of residents. I hope everyone who reads this votes next spring to elect responsible trustees. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 749 Registered: 1-2006 |
Tell the board members to their faces, within three minutes, or face arrest. Live, on TV, and see the responses. Some may be constructive. jd | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 521 Registered: 2-2006 |
Josh Holtz, thanks for mentioning the 10.6 million recently published. So, along with the new 4.6, we now have 15.2 million and rising. A year or two ago, they were talking about something over 8 million for SOPAC costs. As the total continues to rise, how long will it take for them to admit SO's SOPAC debt has more than doubled? Any bets? (The next bright idea from the BOT: SO should build a casino.) | ||
| Soparents Supporter Username: Soparents Post Number: 2262 Registered: 5-2005  |
The BOT seem incapable of doing anything to stop more expenditure. It's unbelievable that no-one is able to stop this. It's almost like someone with a gambling addiction, perhaps if they spend more it will be a success (win) and when they don't, well, perhaps if we spend more it will work out (win)... Is is apparently that there is a LOT more to this and everything else in this town than meets the eye, and it is apparent also that the population are not meant to be privvy to anything of any importance. We are only here to give them the money, apart from that we are nothing. Oh, and SOrising, they will NEVER admit to anything, it will be smoke and mirrors again, or the fault of previous BOT's, or fault of someone else - our BOT are blameless. On your point of a casino, that is a place to gamble, yes?? You're living in it, it is called South Orange..... | ||
| Rastro Citizen Username: Rastro  Post Number: 3611 Registered: 5-2004  |
Just a clarification, SOrising... only $3.6 million of the bond was for SOPAC. So it's $14.2 million. I find that much easier to swallow.  | ||
| susan1014 Supporter Username: Susan1014 Post Number: 1704 Registered: 3-2002 |
Arjay, For clarification, you may want to look back to the early parts of the thread. Much of the issue (according to someone with more historical knowledge than I have) is that the initial construction bids were over budget by $3 million or so, so some of our trustees sat down with one company, hacked $3 million or so out of the budget, and gave that construction company a no-bid contract. Now, years later, we are putting that $3 million back into the contract as what were initially called construction overruns, until people complained about the idea of 30% overruns, so now they are being packaged as necessary features (wheelchair bathroom, decent event kitchen) that were somehow left out of the contract. So, it sounds like, in the end, these items may have done a round trip out of and back into the budget, meanwhile possibly subverting the idea of competitive bids. Questions remain to be answered. Big expensive questions. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 757 Registered: 1-2006 |
Bathrooms for what, max of 100K each? The law required handicapped br's in SO before construction started. Kitchen, about 500K, max for mega kitchen, twice that. wiring claim is a shell game. code unchanged. contractors know what to do. so, help me with my CAPS key, and ask away in my (unavoidable) absence. jd | ||
| SOrising Citizen Username: Sorising Post Number: 523 Registered: 2-2006 |
May SOParents and I borrow your moniker for SO, Joel, "The Incomplete Village" for our own, "The Incomplete Casino"? If the media show up to the meeting Monday night, there should be signs prepared, "Welcome to South Orange The Incomplete Casino" For that matter, a few well placed signs around town might be a good thing also. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1857 Registered: 3-2003 |
Re the fundraising, susan1014 has been asking for a long time when SOAPC was going to begin its fundraisng. Her concern was exactly what appears to have happened. Also, before the election, Eric asked what the $95,000 paid to Targeted Solutions was for. The question has again been asked recently on this board. Perhaps Eric can ask again. My understanding was originally the fundraising was supposed to cover the operating costs, such as salary of the Executive Director,etc. before SOPAC became operational. Now, in addition to the Village funding SOPAC $350,000 for the initial years, the Village is taking out an additional $3.6million bond to cover costs which were never discussed. Perhaps Monday evening SOPAC can answer how much is going to be required from the Village in the next five years, and does this include debt service of the additional $3.6 million bond that the Village is now taking out. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 761 Registered: 1-2006 |
Costs for bathrooms required in the original plans by law. Mysterious, and suspect. jd | ||
| Monster© Supporter Username: Monster Post Number: 4166 Registered: 7-2002  |
Prediction: Certain members or member of the SO BOT will be facing jail time. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 5725 Registered: 1-2004  |
Monster No such luck... If /when they are finally held accountable for thier actions I hope they are all forced to repay the Village. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 765 Registered: 1-2006 |
Should have written: Since the Americans with Disabilities Act became effective years ago, handicapped access bathrooms in public facilities has been mandatory. So, the rest plays out. Maybe the plans were stored in the fundraiser's apartment. jd | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2858 Registered: 4-2002 |
The plans did include a handicapped accessible restroom. It is on the second floor and meant taking an elevator. The SOPAC board thought it would be better to have an additional one on the first floor eliminating the need for a handicapped person to take an elevator first. Some of the changes had to do with improvements the SOPAC board felt were needed to help insure success. SOPAC does plan to have another presentation to the public, but I suggest anyone who has specific questions to call the SOPAC office. Targeted Solutions' expenses were explained and discussed at a BOT meeting some time ago by Ms. Barbara Stoller (she is the chairperson of the SOPAC board). Among other things, he assisted with the recruiting of the executive director, some of the initial plan design of the building, recruiting board members and fundraising. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 10201 Registered: 4-1997  |
The owner of Targeted Solutions (as listed in New Jersey corporate filings) is a woman, so who is "he"? | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2859 Registered: 4-2002 |
Dave: I do not remember his last name. First name was Robert. He lives in S. Orange and I would guess if you called SOPAC or sent an email to John Gross the information would be given to you. I saw him on the train last week so I know he still lives in the village. | ||
| Neen Citizen Username: Neen Post Number: 258 Registered: 1-2004 |
It looks like a complete financial mess has been created that no fabulous executive director will ever be able to fundraise herself out of. Not to mention the fact that since a large chunk of our tax dollars are funding SOPAC, I can't imagine that fundraising from residents is going to be all that successful. | ||
| Spitz Supporter Username: Doublea Post Number: 1859 Registered: 3-2003 |
Here's a link to the BOT meeting where the subject of Targeted Solutions was discussed. Also, was it ever resolved whether the monies paid to SOPAC to cover the shortfalls were a loan from the Village to SOPAC, or an investment by the Village in SOPAC? At the time, there was no clear understanding of how the monies paid by the Village to SOPAC would be treated. And yes Neen, it looks like a financial mess. I know the CBAC had numerous questions. I don't know if they've ever been answered. http://southorange.org/minutes/2004/10-25-04RM.htm | ||
| Soparents Supporter Username: Soparents Post Number: 2345 Registered: 5-2005 |
Thanks Spitz, It seems that nothing ever changes does it? I read the minutes you posted, and the same old issues keep rearing their heads.. Was an agreement ever concreted between the Village and SOPAC? It was intimated in the minutes that it would be forthcoming. | ||
| buddybak Citizen Username: Buddybak Post Number: 29 Registered: 4-2006 |
What's the matter with the design and engineers when they were putting up these plans together to comply with The Americans With Disablaties Act which the town did not comply with. the act should have spelled out what has to be done, with handicapped bathrooms for both men and women (Like how Many are required in a Building like SOPAC.) | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 10202 Registered: 4-1997 |
Mark, Robert Lesnik? -- Registrant: Gamma Investigative Research ATTN: PRIVEYE.COM c/o Network Solutions P.O. Box 447 Herndon, VA. 20172-0447 Domain Name: PRIVEYE.COM Administrative Contact: Robert Lesnick Whois Privacy and Spam Prevention by Whois Source Robert Lesnick ATTN: PRIVEYE.COM c/o Network Solutions P.O. Box 447 Herndon, VA 20172-0447 570-708-8780 | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2862 Registered: 4-2002 |
Dave: Does not sound right. I am pretty sure it began with a "D". buddybak: The plans did comply (there are handicapped stalls in both restrooms on the second floor). Soparents: There was an agreement and there will be a new one for the bond oridinance being proposed. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2863 Registered: 4-2002 |
Some nice person sent me an email with the person's name. It is Robert Dubin. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave Post Number: 10204 Registered: 4-1997 |
Thanks, Ed. | ||
| buddybak Citizen Username: Buddybak Post Number: 30 Registered: 4-2006 |
Mr. Rosner: why didn't it include them on all floors instead of only the second floor only. people shouldn't have to run to the second floor to use the bathrooms. | ||
| mrosner Citizen Username: Mrosner Post Number: 2866 Registered: 4-2002 |
buddybak: That I can't answer other than I am guessing for cost reasons or limitations due to the size of the building. (You can take the elevator ). | ||
| notehead Supporter Username: Notehead Post Number: 3620 Registered: 5-2001  |
Oh, YUCK! I hadn't heard that the building was going to be covered in faux brick, but I see it being applied now. Did the design specifically require that the building be as ugly and dismal-looking as possible? Did some aesthetically-impaired committee of zombies decide that a faux brick exterior would somehow make the building "fit in" better, and be more "village-y" and "quaint?" Hard to imagine a better way to express "we fear modernity" than to construct a huge, brand-new building and cover it in pasty, hopelessly uninspired brick. I suppose I should be glad they didn't opt for vinyl siding. BLECH!!! | ||
| peteglider Citizen Username: Peteglider Post Number: 2089 Registered: 8-2002 |
its real brick, the design is actually an historic one, a bit modernized. I think the metal panels are great -- nice contrast to the brick and moreover serve to soften the building visually. who knows, had they used vinyl, perhaps the additional millions voted on last might not have been needed ;-) /p | ||
| MHD Citizen Username: Mayhewdrive Post Number: 4466 Registered: 5-2001  |
SOP, Did you get an answer to your question last night about the discrepancy between the SOPAC handout (which showed $3M in additional spending) and the Bond Ordinance which (I believe) calls for $3.6M in additional spending for SOPAC? | ||
| Soparents Supporter Username: Soparents Post Number: 2363 Registered: 5-2005 |
3.695M.. (or basically 3.7 million, not 3.6, but who's counting) Not yet. | ||
| Howard Levison Citizen Username: Levisonh Post Number: 663 Registered: 1-2004 |
The bottom line is to understand the impact of SOPAC on the finances of the Village. A simple metric such as $/year per household would go a long way in understanding the issue. Currently SOPAC Expenses budgeted by the Village: Operating: Recreation Budget: $350,000 Capital/Bonding-Notes: $14-16M ($800,000/yr) – interest and principal Construction Loans, Bridge Loan, Seton Hall Loan ) Revenue directly to the Village CDBG: $230,000 Theater Lease: $176,000 Cost per household = $100/year. | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 727 Registered: 6-2005 |
It is clear to me that this town has its priorities very misguided. You have a BOT approving a bond ordinance for an additional $3.6 million for SOPAC changes so that it can be a state of the art live theater, catering kitchen, event room, etc. I, for one, would have preferred state of the art schools. Which do you think will have greater impact on both the populace as well as our home values? What business does this town have being in the theatrical and catering hall rental businesses? They can't manage the business a town normally conducts, now they not only have the real estate development business but these additional businesses as well, with the expertise and know-how for none of them. What the heck is this about except ego and malfeasance? | ||
| jayjay Citizen Username: Jayjayp Post Number: 729 Registered: 6-2005 |
As we see the costs for SOPAC skyrocketting and we hear members of the SOPAC Board confess to having no experience with building a theater/event hall, you have to wonder WHERE IS THE BUSINESS PLAN???? A resident asked a simple question of how much money SOPAC has to take in monthly, yearly etc to cover costs. No one ---not a BOT member or a SOPAC board member or the SOPAC Director could or would answer. This is outrageous. We have to sit back and hope they make enough money to pay back the town. And if not, we will be stuck with a white elephant. They have plowed a bundle of money into making a catering kitchen for a room. Well who will market the facility, who will it compete with, what will the price point be, can it be used while movies/acts are playing, where will event goers park, what kind of staff will it require to run? All we heard is how they need "state of the art". Well how about answering some of these other questions. If this thing does not fly, we will have to take it over and retrofit the building for new uses. Maybe it could be the new village hall or police station or recreation building. Or maybe just the new Old Stone House. |
