Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
1. I have posted on the blog Lodi by the Numbers since 2013. It has provided a public
service by exposing government waste and abuse at all levels. I have provided
investigative reports that have been acted on by state agencies. In 2014, borough
employees were removed from the pension system after a state agency acted on my
blog posts. That is one of many examples. Elected officials throughout New Jersey
contact me after coming across my blog. I am asked about subjects such as New
Jerseys Best Practices Questionnaire for municipalities, rulings on the Open Public
Records Act (OPRA), contracts for professional services, and double-dipping public
employees.
2. This is a personal blog. I never purported to represent the positions of the Board.
This blog contains my personal writings (facts and opinions). I do not speak on
Board members are entitled to express themselves publicly on any matter, including
issues involving the Board and the school district. Individual Board members cannot,
4. Since joining the Board, I have dealt with a lot of confidential information. I never
Background
1. On November 8, 2016, I was elected to the Lodi Board of Education. That election was
the first time in eighteen years that anyone was elected while running opposed to Lodis
very powerful political machine. Complainant Dominic Miller and his two running
2. I spent $230 of my own money on the campaign. I refused all campaign contributions
from others. Mr. Millers team spent upwards of $10,000 on the campaign. He only
showed one contribution for $3,641.16 which came from the campaign account of Lodi
Mayor/Lodi Principal Emil Carafa. Mr. Millers ELEC reports on-line do not list the rest
3. I received more votes than Mr. Miller and his two running mates on November 8th. My
blog served as a means to overcome their big money advantage. I used it to get my
message out. I exposed the lies and fraud of the boards proposed $7.5M administration
building for twenty four employees. I exposed the boards nepotism and hiring practices,
using Marc Capizzis hiring as an example. I exposed the excessive compensation for
Superintendent Frank Quatrone and Business Administrator Marc Capizzi. I exposed
how Mayor Carafa changed the table of organization of the Lodi Police Department so
Mr. Miller can promoted to Sergeant just months after he was appointed to the Lodi
4. I was sworn in on January 4, 2017. At my first meeting, I voted with three other board
members to suspend a $6,053,500 contract that was awarded at a special meeting one
week before (the special meeting was held two days after Christmas when schools were
closed). The contract was for the controversial administration building. Attached is a
5. On April 28, 2017 I submitted an ethics complaint to the SEC against board trustees
6. One week before Mr. Miller filed his complaint, I requested to go into closed session to
discuss the actions of Mr. Capizzi, Mr. Quatrone, Mr. Miller, and Board Attorney Alisa
Dichiara after they submitted a claim with the Boards insurance provider to get Mr.
Miller an attorney for his ethics complaint without Board approval. Past practice was the
Board discussed the claim and then voted on whether to submit it to the insurance
provider. Mr. Miller ignored my two written requests for a closed session and never
7. The timing and events leading up to Mr. Millers complaint point to retaliation, similar to
e. I will recognize that authority rests with the board of education and will make no personal
promises nor take any private action that may compromise the board.
g. I will hold confidential all matters pertaining to the schools which, if disclosed, would
needlessly injure individuals or the schools. In all other matters, I will provide accurate
information and, in concert with my fellow board members, interpret to the staff the aspirations
of the community for its school.
i. I will support and protect school personnel in proper performance of their duties.
j. I will refer all complaints to the chief administrative officer and will act on the complaints at
public meetings only after failure of an administrative solution.
Answer to Complaint
Paragraphs 1 to 5
1. I agree with paragraphs 1-4. Paragraph 5 is Mr. Millers opinion and personal
interpretation.
Paragraph 6
2. I never made any promises on the blog nor did I take any Board actions on the blog. The
blog reports on local news, provides public information, and offers my personal opinions.
Paragraphs 7 and 8
3. My blog post is accurate. I posted public information (user friendly budgets) that are
required to be posted on district websites. Mr. Quatrone wants the Board to pay him $271,543
for unused sick days and vacation days. This arrangement is not clearly stated in Mr. Quatrones
current contract. It hasnt been explained or justified by the board members or attorneys
advocating on Mr. Quatrones behalf. I have spent hours reviewing superintendent contracts in
other districts and they include language capping superintendent pay for unused days at $15,000.
4. I have the right to post public information and raise awareness of a possible abuses.
5. I have expressed my opinion for years that Mr. Quatrones compensation is excessive.
He receives maximum pay of $167,500 and an additional $25,108 merit bonus each year at a
time when Lodi High School is ranked 292 out of 337 schools by NJ Monthly Magazine and
Lodi failed its QSAC review for instruction and program. The papers submitted by Mr.
Quatrone show that he hasnt attained all of his merit goals yet he still receives payment each
year.
Paragraph 9
6. My blog post is accurate. Mr. Miller never asked me if I was interested in being on the
negotiations committee for Mr. Capizzis contract. Mr. Miller never informed me that he chose
the committee which included himself and one other member (they had a two person committee
even though many members did not have a conflict of interest and could have been on the
committee). Mr. Miller never informed me that any negotiations ever took place.
7. At the April 24, 2016 work session, Mr. Miller informed the Board that a negotiations
committee would be chosen for the district custodians whose contract was expiring at the end of
June.
8. Trustee Mastrofilipo and I asked about other contracts that would be expiring. We asked
if any other negotiation committees were chosen. We asked if any other contracts have recently
been negotiated. Mr. Miller stated more than once that no new contracts had been negotiated.
When asked directly if Mr. Capizzis new contract had been negotiated or if any negotiations
took place, Mr. Miller finally admitted that he and one other member had met and negotiated a
new contract for Mr. Capizzi. He never informed the rest of the Board.
9. Mr. Capizzis salary is $171,684 with only five years in the district. He did not hold a
standard certificate for Business Administrator when he was hired in 2012. He had no prior
school experience when he was hired. His position was never advertised and he was the only
one interviewed for the position. His father Joseph Capizzi held this position before him. Joseph
Capizzi retired as Board Secretary in 2012 with a salary of $173,332. He held the position even
though he never had a college degree (a requirement for BS). That is how the Lodi Board
operates.
10. Reporting on local news is not equivalent to taking a private action compromising the
Board. Mr. Miller did engage in furtive conduct and attempted to hide information from the
public. The information in the blog post is accurate and supported by evidence.
11. I encourage the Department of Education to investigate the Boards negotiations process
Paragraph 10
12. I filed an ethics complaint with the SEC regarding this matter. Please refer to the
Paragraph 11
13. The Board is currently involved in contract negotiations with the Lodi Education
Association (LEA). The teachers have worked a year under an expired contract. Mr. Miller was
the only board member on negotiations prior to January. Mr. Miller should not have been on
negotiations. He is a borough employee (Lodi police officer) and Lodi councilwoman Patricia
Licata is a Lodi teacher and member of the bargaining unit. Mr. Miller had negotiated a contract
with the union and the union voted it down. Mr. Miller is no longer a member of negotiations
because I provided an advisory opinion from the SEC pertaining to his conflict of interest. Two
other board members are now on the negotiations committee as they are the only two without
conflicts of interest.
14. At the April 26, 2017 regular board meeting, five members of the union spoke with
prepared statements about working without a new contract. Some of their statements were
negative towards the board. When they were done speaking, Dominic Miller complimented
them and went on to lead a standing ovation. The video was posted on northjersey.com and
15. It is my opinion that Mr. Millers action undermined the Boards position during a time
of negotiations.
16. I expressed my personal opinion on a personal blog about brown-nosing. I did not state
that opinion during a public meeting. I never represented my opinion as that of the Boards.
Paragraph 12
investigate the actions of Mr. Capizzi, current Trustees Miller, Carafa, Nardino, Carbonetti, and
former Trustees Licata and Vara in their efforts to demolish and replace a structurally sound
administration building located at 8 Hunter Street. The price tag was estimated at $7.5 Lodi tax
18. Without the publics knowledge, Joe Licata created a committee for the project which
included himself, Nardino, Carbonetti and Miller. He appointed the committee on August 24,
2015. I had to submit an OPRA request just to see who was on the committee (Exhibit 2). One
month later during a special meeting on September 28, 2015, Joe Licata stated that the
new one be constructed. One month is a short time to make a decision of that magnitude. When
committee members were questioned about their recommendation to demolish, they couldnt
name one other option they explored. Requests were submitted for committee information
(locations of meetings, who was in attendance, what was discussed, etc.). No records were
19. The Board over taxed and over collected millions from the Lodi taxpayers between 2013
and 2016 so they can circumvent the referendum process and avoid a public vote. A public vote
is required to borrow money for school projects. Their budgets were full of gimmicks that
should have been detected by the County Superintendent (Exhibit 3). Taxes were raised for the
20. Former Board President Joseph Licata knowingly lied to the public when he repeatedly
stated that the building is not structurally sound (Exhibit 4). He stated that in a letter to the editor
in the Community News dated August 11, 2016. He knew that was not true. The structural
engineers report had been posted on my blog and discussed at public board meetings.
21. The demolition was scheduled for March 2016. A contract for the project was awarded at
a special meeting held on December 27, 2016. The contract passed with five trustees voting for
and three against. Trustees Miller, Carafa, Nardino, Carbonetti, and Vara voted to award the
contract. Trustees Mastrofilipo, Mara, and Telep voted against the contract. The contract was
suspended one week later on January 4, 2017 when I was sworn in. The vote to suspend the
project and place the question on a ballot passed 4-3-1. Myself, Trustee Mastrofilipo, Trustee
Telep, and Trustee Mara voting to suspend the contract. Trustee Carafa, Trustee Miller, and
Trustee Carbonetti voted against suspending the contract. Trustee Miller abstained.
22. On March 16, 2017, Richard Burke was in attendance for the board meeting. He wrote
the structural assessments for the building. A quote from him that night appeared in the Record
newspaper: "The cost is far less now than in 2015," Burke said. "It's low hanging fruit. Two guys
and one trip to Home Depot can do everything in the attic in a day. Other mason work can be
done in a week. These are not high dollar repairs but will give you a lot of bang for your buck."
(Exhibit 5)
23. At the March 12, 2017 meeting, I informed Mr. Burke that former Board President
Joseph Licata wrote a letter to the editor which stated that the building was not structurally
sound. I asked Mr. Burke if he ever expressed that the building was not structurally sound
because his reports stated the building was structurally sound. Mr. Burke was always consistent
in saying the building was structurally sound. There is no explanation for Licatas dishonest and
deceptive public statements that the building was not structurally sound. I asked Mr. Burke if
fires in the building from decades ago affected its current condition because that was implied by
Mayor Carafa at a council meeting and by Mr. Miller to the Community News during his
November campaign. Mr. Burke explained that the damage from the fires had been taken care of
24. The building is currently being used and does not require any immediate repairs.
25. If it werent for this blog, the truth about their $7.5M scam would never have come to
light. The building would have been demolished in March 2016. The Lodi taxpayers would be
out at least $7.5M. The project was rushed. Those behind it lied to the public. They withheld
26. I have the right to criticize the actions of those that tried to scam Lodi. The same four
trustees that deceived the public and rushed the project tried to block the referendum from
appearing on the November ballot. Everyone should be criticizing their actions and questioning
their motives. The Department of Education should investigate their actions. Hundreds of
thousands of tax dollars were wasted on architectural plans for a building that was never needed.
27. Residents of Lodi thank me for exposing this scam and helping to suspend it. This blog
provided a public service. I was reporting on the subject before the newspapers.
Paragraph 13
28. My blog post is accurate. The referendum vote had been discussed and brought up for
months. Mr. Capizzi had delayed it. I did not catch anyone off guard when I made the motion to
place the referendum on the November ballot during the April 24 work session. The Board had
already voted during its January 4, 2017 meeting to let the public have its say on a nonbinding
referendum. The Board had to set a date. Mr. Capizzi went out of his way to put off the vote
until the next meeting because his two reliable votes (Carafa and Nardino) were not in
attendance. The following meeting, the motion to place the question on the November ballot
failed with a 4-4 vote. It would have passed the April 24th meeting if Mr. Capizzi did not
interrupt us.
Paragraph 14
30. My blog post is accurate. Mr. Millers vote blocked the referendum from the November
ballot. Mr. Miller recommended the $7.5 scam. He promoted the project. He mislead the
public. He voted to award a $6,053,500 contract at a special meeting two days after Christmas.
The Board suspended the project and voted to place the question on a ballot.
31. I will always fight for the Lodi residents and their right to vote. I have the right to
Paragraph 15
32. My blog post is accurate. Lodi Mayor Emil Carafa made public statements supporting
the project. He made misleading statements about the costs to repair the building. The four
members that voted to block Lodis right to vote are closely connected to Mayor Carafa. Trustee
Carafa is the mayors son. Trustee Nardino is the mayors first cousin. Trustee Miller was
promoted in the police department while Carafa was mayor. Dominic Miller reported a
Paragraph 16
33. My blog post is accurate. Please refer to my answer to Millers Paragraph 9. I believe
the Board President did engage in improper conduct when he negotiated Mr. Capizzis contract
behind the Boards back and then lied about it when questioned at a public meeting. Why were
there only two members on the negotiating team when other members expressed interest and did
Paragraph 17
34. My blog post is accurate. The post provided a link to a northjersey.com article. Board
Paragraph 18
35. My blog post is accurate. I strongly recommend that the Department of Education
investigate if Mr. Quatrone attained his merit goals this year. His own papers show that he did
not achieve goal #2 (hibservention) and goal #5 (best practices). He even listed excuses why he
didnt achieve the goals he set for himself. For goal #2, he wrote that hibstervention (software)
had too many glitches. For goal #5, he wrote that best practices werent observed in other
districts because schools had PARCC testing going on. He did not achieve the original goals he
set.
36) Mr. Quatrone received the maximum $25,108 merit bonus every year since 2011. His
goals are not aligned to any measureable achievements like standardized test scores or
performance. Lodi High School is ranked 292 out of 337 schools by New Jersey Monthly
Magazine. Lodi failed its QSAC review for program and instruction. Measurable indicators
show a decline in our districts performance while Mr. Quatrone collects his merit bonuses. The
board does rubber-stamp his goals. Most Board members dont understand the goals. They
37) I believe the board members are derelict in duties when they award $25,108 merit
bonuses for goals that arent outside the scope of Mr. Quatrones basic duties. They are not
linked to achievement. Some payments are approved when goals arent attained. Members
approving those goals have family members employed in the Lodi schools in six figure positions.
38) I have expressed my concerns many times to Mr. Quatrone and the Board at our
meetings.
39) I never disclosed anything confidential about the merit goals. They appear on public
agendas and minutes. They are accessible from the district website.
40) I will never support or condone abuses by the Superintendent or Board members that vote
Paragraph 19
41) No Board actions were ever taken on my blog. No private actions on behalf of the Board
43) Lodi is plagued by nepotism, corruption, and political patronage. My blog provides a
44) If the Department of Education refers my posts to an investigative agency, it will learn
45) There should be an investigation into the $7.5M administration building scam. That
2. I have read the Verified Answer to which this Verifying Certification is attached and the
responses set forth therein are true unless expressly stated as based upon information and
belief.
3. I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the
foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
Newly elected board member Ryan Curioni made the motion for the referendum at the reorganization meeting
on Jan. 4. A public vote was never needed because the money for the project was coming from a capital
reserve fund. Curioni argued that the project is still being paid by taxpayers and that they should have input in
(Photo: Kristie the decision. "It's 100-percent tax dollars, so why can't the people vote on it?" he asked.
Cattafi/NorthJersey.com)
- ---
"It's the people's money; they should have voted for it."
- - - - - - - - - ------- -- --- ----- -------
_______________J
A contract that accepted a $6,053,500 bid from Vanas Construction Co. of Bogota was approved 5-3 on Dec. 27. The money is being allocated from the
district's capital reserve account and will not result in a property tax increase, according to Schools Superintendent Frank Quatrone.
Board Secretary-Business Administrator Marc Capizzi said he doesn't know when the referendum will take place and that it would be a non-binding vote
just to get the public's input. "It will then be at the board's discretion to take any further action ," he said.
The existing administration building at 8 Hunter St. - a former elementary school - currently houses 24 employees, the school board offices, the
superintendent's office and the district's child study team. The two-story building has 19,000 square feet; the new one would have 18,000. Work was
originally scheduled to begin March 1.
"Children are not housed in the building, but there are many meetings with students," Quatrone said. "It's a busy and very active building."
The $6 million is for demolition and construction only. There are other associated expenses , including a $600,000 contingency fund, $200,000 for
furniture and fixtures and $300,000 for environmental and site costs, bringing the total to around $7 .1 million, according to Capizzi.
The costs also do not include temporary space for employees during the estimated 16-month construction period. Capizzi said the board is considering
"Just because we prepaid for it doesn't mean it's not taxpayers' money," board member Alfonso F. Mastrofilipo Jr. said. "The people are upset and think
we did it without them."
Capizzi told the board that he had already signed a contract after the board approved the decision last week. On Thursday, Capizzi said he was notified
that the contract had not been executed by the construction company yet. "He will be notified that the project has been suspended and the contract is on
hold," he said.
The board approved a referendum on the building 4-3-1, with Curioni, Mastrofilipo, Jeff Telep and Robert Marra voting in favor, board President Dominic
Miller abstaining and members Michael Nardino, Jonathan Carafa and Philip Carbonetti voting against it.
Good Mo rnin g,
After receiving our meeting pac ket on Friday, 1 noti ced item # 12 of the Business Ad mini strator's report
regarding the stru ctu ra l engineerin g report/assess ment of the Linco ln School building, I had phon e ca lls w ith
Ma rc and f rank to get some prel imin ary information from this assess ment. The fact of the matter is that there
are some safety concern s that ex ist due to various factors and a building that is close to 120 yea rs old.
In the interest of be ing proactive and not reactive, it is necessary that the Board acts svv iftly regardin g the safety
concerns of' the Lincoln Sc hool Building. 'Therefore, I am appoi nting a specia l comm ittee to review the
structura l assessment report, speak to the engineerin g fi rm (if necessary), and ultimate ly come to a
recommendation for the entire Board.
... 20 17 (209)
Make no mistake, taxes were raised for the ..,_ June (57)
Here was a tax increase for the project: Lodi payroll one ye
Licata 's promotic
explain Licata1s p
Lodi school budgt.-. t 1aises proprrty tc1x t"'s by $154 "United for Scorzet
candidate acceler
Mnrdi .19 ?O I ~
HY K[J;.f Lt iJ=.DDFKF. Repost: Deputy Chi
ST A FF \VR ITF. R they said, what th
Thf Rt;rin i
Tonight's council
Uuder th<' 2015 H ;p mdu1g pla11, -,el10 L1! t:tw> fo r 111.- tm ue r of u l101ne ,1; ; e-,w d al lht' l>Jrt1ttg.h ;1\<.'rage -
meeting ... how al
s~ rn 19 5 will ml'1N\W by ') l 'i.J ~ cc o rd 1t1 ? to fi ~ u10 s pro,ict,<l by Cap in 1
Licata pr.. .
All ctmeul prn grruu ~ will be mamtawed 111 tbe b11<lget Cap1zz1 >aid lb.;- budge t also fi iud s bathroom re1Lu Ya l1o u~
"Saddle Ri ver cop t
11t \Vi J<,011 Elf' mc111:uy ;rnd tli<' l';p];1('<'illl' lll oft\\'<' bn1it'r<; :1 t T.0 1!1 T! 1ph Sch<H' I cl a\~ roorn flom, :11 \\'i l-.on
$450,000 settlem
e lem entary and a roo ftop heating tllut at Roos.e\'elt EI..meniary
Superintendent sick
St nt1 :i1d lo th" tb-.tnN w1ll 11 1 c 11'!l ~ <' , Ji p,h tl y rn SI-I 91 7,'5 9 7 from 'tl l .89 :; <en , :itrouh np to C ;1p 1n 1 Th:i t payouts : how doe
mnotmt mclu dt>s S16,849 m 1mderncl.;-qu acy aid. wtuch 1; a new ca tegory o f fu nd in g mten<led to hel p d 1 ~ mc t s that com .. .
ar<' '> j)~Ltd mg I<'~ ~ th:u1 wh:it lite -..lalt' fu ndmg fonmila c v11 ~ 1def'> :id~ qu a t e li.1 pro\' 1de a thcrm 1g h educ:1l1011
Advisory opinion fc
C'ap1zn charncten zed !he am o un t r;s "nominal ..' ' but Supermieudent Frank Quatrnnt> said the extrn :u d w ould help Scorzetti or anyo1
tlw t.h ~ l n d p:i\' for <':-tp (m 1, tl wl a n uo l <.>!' th rri11trol ~ ud 1n '> 111 r 1-,d w ' 111 ni ~ h li>r '1wn ;1l d m:1.tmu . . 111&11 1
Was Mayor Carafa
n1 itro11 and t1 :rn ;;1J<)1'1:11l<1 n an,l lw:i lt h c :i 1< Tl ean b C' chffn ull 10 ,-0111:m1 ~ 11d1 " '''-h n-lult' al<>o n' m :Hmnp \'Vlfh lll th1'
with Joe Capizzi
, 1nte-i.naadated 2 p<'rceut cnp 011 mr re a w ~ IL' the g<m<>ral fond tax leq , i:..~u a l roll<' >:ud.
16 names submitted
"T hi' ~<ld1trn11 :1 l aid <IO<' ' lw lp 11 ... .11 Q11:111011t; <,;! Ill
vacant BOE seat.
- s.-.. 111 ort ;lt http ffw ww u011h111s1.y \'01 1 lh w w~ 'l od1 - ,t hiX1l - l 11 u l p:' l - r:l 1.> f'<i - p row r t y - l a ;.;.1 '> -b ) '- l '; .J .
; , ~; j:
2 of 4 6/25117, 10:21 PM
Lodi by the Numbers: Make no mistake, taxes were raised for the Lincoln Schoo l project. http: //lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2017/01 /make-no-mistake-taxes-were-raised-for.htm I
Here is where your tax dollars were stashed away for the Make no mistake, t~
raised for the Lin
project:
Great news for Lod
getting a referend
Reorganization toni
Advertised Recapitu lation of Ba lances LODI BOROUGH
Should one week ar
duck cost you $7.
~ 2016 (257)
~ 2015 (215)
~ 2014 (123)
3 of 4 6/25117, 10,21 PM _L
Lodi by the Numbers: Budgets Should Be Based on Education.. . http ://Jodi overhaul.blogspot.com/2014/09/budgets-should-be-based-on ...
... 201
... 201
T 201
... I
Lodi: ...
... (
. '' T
H
Revenues from Local Sources:
Local Tax Levy 10- 210 38,057,473 38,818,622 3S.330,150
Unrestricted Wscellaneous Revenues 400 .190 145.600 168,960
Interest Earned On C rrem E xpense Emergency Res 671 0 v
Interest Earned On Caprtal Reserve Funds 21 0
Subtot3 1- Revenues From Locaf Sc rces 38.458,355 38,964,222 38.4!19.1 10
T
B
The Lodi BOE's "total
, operating budget" really stands out amongst
its neighbors. How could it increase $8,645,540 in just one year? T
Why was it adjusted to show an even larger increase than what the
papers initially reported? How could the "Adjustment for Prior
~
Year Encumbrances" in '13-'14 be so large in comparison to any
~
other district you look at?
~
Hasbrouck Heights: ~ j
Saddle Brook:
Operating Budget:
,
Revenues from l oca l Sources:
local Ta x Levy 10- 210 26 .813,073 27,349,334 28, 157 ,707
Total Tuition -i300 50,000
Unrestricted Miseefl(lneous Revenues -lXXX 3 7.593 271 .SCO 263 ,300
Interest Earned On Capital Reserve Funds - xxx 0 500 500
Subtot::lf - Revenues From Local Sources 27 ,130,666 27.621 ,334 28,5 1,507
Wood-Ridge:
3 of 5 6/25/17, 10:37 PM
Lodi by the Numbers: Breaking down Licata's lies ($7.5 million administration building) ... http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/20 16/08/breaking-down-licatas-lies-7 5-million.html
~\i\~,*' ~
Lodi by the Numbers
.... 20 17 (209)
T August (29)
Licata voted YES o
attorney's bills ...
People can read the whole report for themselves. It is Joe Capizzi switche
cars, drives aroun
contained in the link below:
Scorzetti's Tahoe vs
Median Househo
http://lodioverhaul.blogspot.com/2015/12/what-are-
Opportunity "rather
capizzis-true-motives-there-is.html presented itself' ..
.. Licata stated at the November meeting that children meet There is NO benefi1
belittling of tea...
with the Child Study Team in that building and he
Why the School Bo
wouldn't want it on him if someone got hurt. Licata had directly impacts)
children meet there for nine months since making that Lodi Chief's retiren
statement. So much for the fake urgency. was a whole lot n
Licata: "The board, after weighing a multitude of options, Breaking down Lie<
($7.5 million adrr
unanimously supported a decision to build a new
Licata: long-windec
building." the place, but ne ..
Almost a decade of
Truth: Neither Licata nor any Board member were able to appeals, and still
name one other option discussed when questioned at the Borough bills are m
November and December meetings. August...
Donald Scorzetti's s
All evidence shows that Joe Capizzi planned this building increased $24,77 .
before he retired and before there was any engineer Dominic Miller's si:
increased $12,27'.
report. No other options were ever considered.
$1,596.86 more tax
went to Licata's 1
Truth: After the Board already voted to move forward ~ June (15)
with $7.5 million project, it did NOT have enough in their ~ May (7)
Concerns include first-floor joists beneath a non-load-bearing corridor partition that are not up to current code limits, but are stable. The report also says
the floor framing is not adequate for large storage loads and would require reinforcing. There are also cracked rafters in the framing, which was named as
a concern in the 2015 inspection. More deterioration has occurred in the brick and mortar identified in 2015.
The main difference between the reports, Burke explained, was that in 2015, there was one critical area found in support framing and ceiling frames. He
said they were completely unsupported and unsafe, but they have since been repaired and are currently holding to safety codes.
"There has been no increase in problems since the initial inspection two years ago," Burke said. "The building is structurally sound. The
recommendations with maintenance will give the building a long life."
Burke said the original report listed complete renovations that would cost millions of dollars, but the new report listed recommendations that are cost-
effective after seeing that there was no progression in deterioration. For example, the original report recommended replacing all the windows, but Burke
now said the framing of the windows needs to be refreshed to prevent water damage.
"The cost is far less now than in 2015," Burke said. "It's low-hanging fruit. Two guys and one trip to Home Depot can do everything in the attic in a day.
Other mason work can be done in a week. These are not high-dollar repairs but will give you a lot of bang for your buck."
The board didn't discuss what actions they will take at the meeting. Board Secretary-Business Administrator Marc Capizzi said the board will discuss its
options at a future meeting and then will need to seek out cost estimates on any work they want to conduct.
The administration building at 8 Hunter St. - a former elementary school - currently houses 24 employees, the school board offices, the
superintendent's office and the district's child-study team. Demolition work was originally scheduled to begin March 1, after the board in December
accepted a $6,053,500 bid to demolish and rebuild the building from Vanas Construction Co. of Bogota. However, in January, newly elected board
member Ryan Curioni made a motion to put a hold on construction until a public vote can be held, which the board approved.
New assessment ordered on Lodi building
(http://www.northjersey.com/story/news/bergen/lodi/2017/02/20/structural-
assessment-ordered-121-year-old-building/97950006/)
In January, the board voted in a split decision to postpone razing the building until a referendum can be held. The last assessment, also by Becht
Engineering, was done in 2015. At the time the findings said the building was in good structural condition but needed "critical repairs."
"I'm very concerned about the building and the whole situation," board member Michael Nardino said. "I hope we can take some proper actions whether
we repair or replace it. The board really needs to concentrate on this effort. Many people visit the building every day. We just want to do the right thing."
The two-story building, which has survived two fires, is 19,000 square feet. The proposed new one would be 18,000 square feet.
A public vote was not needed originally because funding was coming from a capital reserve fund. Curioni argued that the project is still being funded by
taxpayers, and that they should have input in the decision.
"I think that no real problem presented itself," Curioni said. "I think the administration went looking for a problem. Columbus Elementary School is 100
years old, but I don't see them sending a structural engineering report on the building or other buildings approaching that age. It seems like their minds
are made up and they tried to justify it."
Curioni said the board hasn't selected a time for the referendum, but he is pushing for the upcoming November election to save money on the cost of a
special election and to encourage more voter turnout.
Email: cattafi@northjersey.com