PAYMENT

(Continued from Page 1)

While Detrick didn’t offer any public explanation for his decision to break ranks, it could perhaps be best explained by Detrick having been an attorney himself for several decades and having respect for the profession, as well as hearing from Business Administrator Daniel Hornickel, who is also a lawyer, that he “verified” that the attorneys at issue “performed services” and had produced “deliverables,” and that he therefore “approved” the bills to be submitted for council’s consideration. Also prior to Detrick’s vote was a confirmation that the attorneys could file suit against the township if the bills aren’t paid within 30 days of them being posted.

Gardner, who started the March 15 argument and carried it on for almost ten minutes, was told by someone at the dais that he “doesn’t want to get into this,” but the council president shot back, “I do want to get into this!”

It began when the council president pointed out that posted to the March 9 bill’s list were two invoices that had been submitted by the law firm of Dasti, McGuckin, Ulaky, Koutsouris (with Mayor Jack Tompkins having previously appointed the law firm, and later, specifically naming attorney Jerry Dasti), one for $2,372 and the other for $2,315.

“My question is, ‘What services did the Dasti firm provide for the township and when?” asked Gardner, who previously told Dasti, when he went to provide counsel at a council meeting, that he didn’t know who the man was and that the council had no items in its packets approving him.

Gardner had made these statements despite Tompkins having previously made a pronouncement that he was appointing Dasti as temporary township solicitor and having maintained that the appointment authority in Pemberton’s form of government rests with the mayor under the Faulkner Act.

Gardner had countered that longtime Township Attorney Andrew “Andy” Bayer, a longtime ally of the previous Democratic administration, was still the municipal attorney due to a “holdover” provision in his contract that he maintained allows him to serve in the event council didn’t decide on an appointment (with the body having voted 3-2 on two previous occasions this year to turn down Tompkin’s choice).

Since that time, in a Feb. 15 compromise, however, the mayor reversed course and issued another recommendation for Bayer to occupy the municipal solicitor’s post for 2023, while Dasti is to serve as special counsel, including for “litigation matters and other legal work, as assigned.”

The council-approved actions memorializing the compromise apparently “backdated” the terms of agreements for both

Bayer and Dasti to Jan. 1.

“I reviewed the invoices from the attorneys listed on there,” said Hornickel in an initial reply to Gardner’s March 15 question. “I verified that the attorneys performed services. I did have deliverables from the attorneys, and therefore, I approved for those items to be on the agenda for the bill’s list.”

That response led Gardner to ask, “What are the ‘deliverables?’” and, “What ‘services’ did they provide?”

Initially, the business administrator replied that Dasti has been working on “some economic development projects” as well has been aiding his office with a redevelopment plan and purchase agreement.

But when Gardner pointed out there were “two separate bills” from Dasti’s law firm appearing on the bill’s list and asked why that is the case, Hornickel revealed that they covered work performed in both January and February, leading the council president to press for the details of the scope of work performed in January.

“He worked in January on the issue of the township solicitor,” Hornickel responded.

Gardner, already pointed with his questioning towards the business administrator, retorted, “OK – to the best of my knowledge Mr. Dasti was not appointed to this township in January!”

“He just got recently appointed, I believe,” pointing to the Feb. 15 appointment, initially not recognizing an earlier point made by Hornickel that when council made that decision, “council approved the contract for the entire year,” or backdated Dasti’s term of service.

As Gardner forged ahead with a challenge, the business administrator contended that Dasti “was appointed at the first council meeting” of 2023 and “was confirmed at the Feb. 15 meeting.”

“How was he appointed?” Gardner demanded to know, with Hornickel replying, “The mayor appointed him!”

“I mean – the mayor appointed him,” said Hornickel in appearing to become somewhat frustrated by the council president’s continued line of questioning. “I mean – I am not in the middle of this problem – you are.”

After telling the business administrator he was “sorry,” Gardner recounted that “to the best of my knowledge the mayor temporarily appointed him,” asking for verification of that, to which the mayor, a veteran of the Armed Services, replied, “Yes, sir.”

Tompkins having responded to Gardner for the first time, however, caused the council president to turn to him for continued pointed questioning, including by asking the mayor, “Under what ‘authority?’”

“Under my appointing authority under the Faulkner Act!” declared Tompkins, with the council president further inquiring about what specific township code he has cited for the basis of the appointment, with the mayor ultimately responding that he appointed

Dasti “under the Faulkner Act.”

Gardner, however, demanded to know “what section” of the act was used and how the appointment was accomplished, which solicited a declaration from the mayor that Dasti’s appointment was made “under my appointment authority as mayor of the township!”

Tompkins further contended that Pemberton has a “strong mayor form of government,” and when Gardner persisted in asking for a specific provision under the township code for the basis of that decision, responded that the “Faulkner Act is over the township code.”

“OK – you stated in that (reorganization) meeting you ‘temporarily appointed’ him, but under what provision in the code did you use … to appoint him?” Gardner asked once again, to which Tompkins replied, “Councilman, I have already answered this question.”

It was at that moment when Gardner pulled out an ordinance he maintained actually regulated and defined the temporary appointment authority powers in the township government, and in reading it aloud “just for the record,” said it dictates, “Temporary appointments to positions require advice and consent of the council pursuant to applicable state law and shall not be made without express authorization of township council, except that the mayor may designate a current township employee to perform the duties of a vacant position unless applicable laws preclude such a designation.”

“So, my question to you Mr. Mayor is, first of all, ‘Where is the appointment council approved to appoint Mr. Dasti back in January?’” Gardner asked. “Also, since Mr. Dasti was not a township employee, and could not be appointed under these guidelines, and secondly, there was no vacant position as far as in January, how did you appoint Mr. Dasti and his firm? You state you used the Faulkner Act, but the ordinance says what needs to be done! How did you do that?”

Tompkins replied the appointment “was a verbal” and “at the time I thought – and still think – there is no ‘holdover.’”

“So that created a vacancy for solicitor, and as you know, we are required to have a solicitor,” Tompkins added. “So, I appointed Mr. Dasti under my appointment authority.”

But Gardner retorted, “You said you ‘thought’” and asserted “the ordinance does not say ‘how you think’ or ‘how you feel’” about an appointment, but rather “it tells you what you are supposed to do.”

“I would have to research this,” the mayor responded, to which the council president declared, “I have it right in front of me!,” prompting Tompkins in the exchange to assert, “It is not in front of me, councilman!”

Gardner ultimately maintained that Tompkins can “research” the matter.

“But I am not going to approve any payment to any agency or group that was not employed by the township or approved by the council,” Gardner declared. “What you did, in my opinion, is overstepping your boundaries, hiring someone without our approval!”

Tompkins, in response, asked a question of Gardner, “I do believe I have a spending authorization up to $6,000, is that correct?” Gardner maintained, however, “it still has to be approved,” while the mayor maintained he has a spending authorization up to $6,000 without needing to seek council’s consent (it was raised in 2020 from $3,000 at the request of administration when the department was still under the control of longtime Democratic Mayor David Patriarca, who lost to Tompkins last November, with it being described as a way to streamline the approval of small purchases and because the municipality had retained a Qualified Purchasing Agent (QPA) who already reviews any purchases).

“I make a motion on the bill’s list, dated 3-9-2023, to pay all items on the bill’s list, except page 5, Dasti …,” asserted Gardner. He was interrupted by McCartney, however, who requested a “quantity” for items be placed on future bill’s list, pointing to a purchase of a 4 ounce bottle of sunscreen for $79, maintaining she had been paying closer attention to the items listed on them since Dewey raised questions about some of the recent expenditures at a prior session and expressed his belief there is ongoing “waste.”

“I don’t know how many bottles that is,” she said. “I don’t think it is just one. I don’t know ...”

But Tompkins, appearing to pay closer attention to Gardner’s motion that would have at the very least delayed payment to Dasti’s firm, with 9th District Republican Senator Chris Connors one of its esquires, asked if council wants to “put them on hold.”

“I don’t want to get sued for not paying our bills,” the mayor declared.

Bayer initially responded that he would “not think ‘your’ lawyer would sue you right away,” but when Tompkins reminded Bayer that he was the “township solicitor” now and he was simply asking a question of him as the township’s legal counsel, Bayer replied, “Sure, no problem Mr. Mayor.”

That’s when Hornickel re-entered the fray.

“We have a contract for 2023,” said the business administrator of the agreement with the law firm of Dasti, McGuckin, Ulaky, Koutsouris to serve as the town’s special counsel. “It’s for the whole year – and whether or not they were appointed later in the year, the contract is for 2023.”

Gardner recognized it was “backdated to 2023,” but maintained the bills covered a period “when he (Dasti) “wasn’t appointed to work in the township.”

“Council president – with all due respect, both attorney contracts were backdated to Jan. 1, the one for Mr. Bayer and the one for

See PAYMENT/ Page 13

England revealed a floor plan for a possible new town hall that would have the building at “just under 12,000 square feet” in total size.

The prospective structure is proposed to have a “multi-use facility,” he explained, that “can be used simultaneously or separately without affecting the other parts,” with there being a total of three main spaces, including a “community-use type space,” an “admin section” and “court and committee function.”

All three spaces, he emphasized, as currently planned, would have their own separate entrances, so that, for example, if the community portion of the building is being used at night, the rest of the facility “would be locked out.”

In pointing to the preliminary just under 12,000 square-foot size of the proposed town hall, England declared it is a “sweet number for us to be under.”

A facility greater in size, he maintained, would necessitate the installation of a fire suppression or fire sprinkler system and in the “absence of public water supply” in the area, “you don’t want to go there.” Such systems, he noted, are also “very expensive.”

The “schematic design floor plan” he was presenting, England maintained, has architecture that is “very cyclical” and is “not linear,” emphasizing that it is “very early on in the process” still and “this is the time to make changes.”

He revealed the presented floor plan is “probably the fourth iteration” so far, or one “where we think it satisfies the program.” The floor plan development is part of the second phase of the planning process for the project, he noted, with developing a “program” part of the first phase, or one where it is determined “what goes into the building,” including what functions and storage functions are needed.

In highlighting some of the details of the three main uses for the proposed municipal building, England said the admin section would have a traditional center entrance in which the public would enter “kind of a little vestibule.” From there, the public would be directed to one of three “access windows,” one for construction, one for the tax office and another for general administration.

He pointed out the current plan would have doors on either side of those access windows and that if you needed to go into the office spaces, it would work where “you would be let in by the proper admin personnel.”

The court and committee function area, England explained, would have “all the security needs for the courts,” as well as a dais, judge’s chambers, private meeting rooms, an area for the prosecutor and a small meeting room for an attorney. There would also be a couple meeting areas, he said, “that can be used for the committee.”

As for the community-use type space, he described it as being an “open space for community meetings,” that would include a kitchen.

All of this, he summarized, is “today’s very early concept plan for the town hall concept.”

Once the floor plan “meets the committee’s approval,” he added, the professionals will begin the next phase, or the design development phase, in which the “systems, finishes, and mechanical systems” are worked out.

“That is when the cost estimates come in, or determining what the project could cost,” England contended. “Until you know the systems, or what it looks like, it (detailing costs) is a moot point.”

Following the next planning phase, England explained that there would be a construction document phase, which he described as being “10 percent inspiration, 90 percent perspiration,” with it featuring “a lot of hard work” such as “getting drawings together” and “getting the project out to public bid.” The final planning phase is the bidding negotiation phase, when the project would be put out to bid and advertised, the architect noted.

“It is a long, long process,” he noted, pointing out a school project he is working to design currently involves 226 pages worth of design plans.

The floor plans, as well as an overall concept plan for the complex presented March 27 by Township Engineer Tom Leisse, of Pennoni Associates, also featured two other prospective buildings proposed to be built at 144 Carranza Road, including “a building for Public Works,” that includes an admin function, and a barn to store the department’s vehicles.

The prospective main Public Works facility would be about 8,000 square-feet, according to England, with a woman who did not identify herself noting that about 3,500 square-feet of that space would comprise the admin function for Public Works.

England pointed out that the barn is planned to feature five bays, including one that is a wash bay. The intention behind erecting the barn, he explained, is that “most” of the department’s vehicles are “very new” and they are currently sitting outside, subjected to the elements.

“So, every one of these pieces’ of equipment could be put inside, whereas most are sitting outside right now,” the architect said.

Additionally, according to Leisse – who emphasized the township is in the “beginning stages of the site plan design” and that there is some “flexibility for revisions and changes” –there would be a “salt storage area” as well as a recycling center for residents.

Among the couple of things he pointed to in presenting the site plan is that there is an encroachment “restriction” posed by 300foot wetlands transition buffer, and that the professionals “took the overall site plan and moved it as close to the line as possible to provide for the most visibility we could,” as there had been some previous concern that the parcel in question was a flag lot, or not visible from the road, though Township Solicitor William Burns said at a previous meeting that particular concern had been eliminated by the township committee moving to now purchase both lots that comprise 144 Carranza Road.

The plan, maintained Leisse on March 27, would provide “maximum buffering” and is “positioned to provide the most buffering for noise,” with that being another concern previously expressed by residents whose homes surround 144 Carranza Road.

Leisse acknowledged that “not included” on the preliminary site plan is anticipated landscape buffering, which he vowed “will be put on the side and front of the buildings to give some protections.”

As for the layout of the three buildings featured in the proposed layout, Leisse, in pointing to the drawing, said the “municipal building would go in the center” and the “DPW building would go here and here,” or in the rear of the municipal building.

Planned parking, he maintained, “meets the minimum for the ordinance” and “satisfies the requirements.” Additionally, it is outlined that there would be handicapped-accessible parking and the proposed lot would also feature electric vehicle charging stations as per state law.

“What about elevations?” asked Committeeman William Sprague. “What does the building look like on the outside?”

England responded that developing elevations is “part of the next phase” and that the professionals are “not there yet.” They will be developed, he contended, “once we get a floor plan that meets your approval.”

Moore opened the floor plans presentation by stating he would like to “hold public comment” on it until the township committee’s upcoming April 17 workshop meeting to “give everyone chance to digest the plans,” including the township committee, and so that those who don’t like to speak at the microphone can have a chance to email their questions to the township.

He declared of likely public comment on the unveiled plans, “we want to hear you,” and would not “stick to a time limit” on April 17.

After that remark was made – but before the presentation – during a public comment section for the March 27 meeting that occurred early on, resident Jason Litowitz, a former local board of education member, took the mayor to task.

“Mayor Moore, just a moment ago, you said you ‘want to hear us,’” Litowitz said. “In December, you had a meeting for the potential town hall, and every single member of the public that spoke – say one, was thoroughly against moving forward with the Carranza Road project. And the only one who said they were not against it, and I am not going to speak for her, but her words were not so much an endorsement of the project, but a thankyou for getting her and her colleagues out of a building that is dangerous.”

Litowitz then pointed out “what has happened” since that time, asserting, “banks started to fail” and “interest rates were raised at least nine times in a row.”

“Yet, you are clearly going ahead,” he said. “You have gone ahead to approve the concept and purchase. Now you got floor plans for this project. It is going to be multiple millions of dollars. Thanks to the Feds who just increased interest rates, purchasing power through bonds is not going to give just as much as they would have two weeks ago. This is not the right time for this project!”

Litowitz, in pointing to four other solutions proposed by some the town’s former leaders, including making an offer to the owner of an old schoolhouse on Carranza Road, asking Holy Eucharist Roman Catholic Church for use of some of its land, and tying into the local school district’s septic system, quipped, if there “was progress on any of the four suggestions made, I’ve not heard a word of it.”

Moore, as often has been the case since the project was first proposed, simply thanked the resident for his public comments.

Resident and transparency advocate Stuart Brooks then spoke and asserted that the township committee should “be more transparent.”

“I have never seen a pubic agency so obsessed with giving as little public information as possible,” Brooks declared. “You answer almost no questions. … I am still waiting for answers to questions that you, Mr. Moore, said will be answered 100 percent (back during a December town hall forum on the possible municipal complex). Then Mr. Burns asked

See PLAN/ Page 14

Animal Control Officer Reappointment for Pemberton Borough ‘Tabled’ After Official Cites ‘Zeroes’ in Reports, But Attests to Ongoing Issues

By Douglas D. Melegari

Staff Writer

PEMBERTON BOROUGH—A resolution reappointing Animal Control, LLC, as Pemberton Borough’s animal control officer has been “tabled” after a borough councilwoman maintained issues have been reported to the company, but reports continually show “zero” calls made to the municipality.

“Since I have been on council, seated in January, the animal control report is showing zeroes,” maintained Councilwoman Diana Fanucci. “I am just wondering why we keep using this company when they can’t come out and set the traps we have been requesting for months.”

Fanucci, who described an ongoing feral cat issue occurring on her street, maintained that she “always gets told ‘You’re on the list,’” asking, “Where is the list?” and “What kind of list is this?”

“There can’t be a million people calling for traps at the same time!” she declared. “We have this cat that is bothering us on our street! It wakes us up at all hours of the night, making this horrible noise that only cats can make. I just don’t understand why we keep rehiring this company that is not doing

Payment

(Continued from Page 10)

“hold off” on paying Dasti’s bills of “$4,000 plus” until he “gets an actual invoice for those services” so that “we can see how they are broken down.” anything for us. Is there another option out there for animal control?”

Mayor Harold Griffin replied that, “I don’t think there is,” but that the borough “can look into that,” to which Fanucci responded, “That is all I ask because it is getting really frustrating.”

Councilman Steven Fenster, who ran with the GOP councilman despite being a Democrat, and who lives on the same street as Fanucci, declared, “I agree with Diane” and that he is “not in favor of this company” because he has “had issues with them for years.”

However, Council President Terry Jerome asked if the measure that would have appointed Animal Control, LLC for the year as borough animal control officer could simply be tabled for now, to which council unanimously agreed to do.

While a telephone call made to the firm March 29 did not generate an immediate response by this newspaper’s deadline time, a message on the company’s answering machine notes that it has been “proudly” providing animal control services “for over 10 years.” The message also asked for anyone with requests for service to go through their local police department.

Mr. Dasti,” Hornickel responded.

Bayer then answered the question posed earlier by Tompkins that “like any bill on the list,” if it is “not paid in a timely fashion, the vendor could sue for services because his services have been provided.” Bayer revealed that there had previously been a prior dispute over some services he performed for the township, believing it was before Tompkins time on council (he served as a councilman in 2015 and 2016), with a bill of his “taken off the list” and “pushed back a month or two,” though “it worked out” and he “never sued.”

“Yeah, a vendor could sue if they go unpaid for more than 30 days,” Bayer acknowledged.

Going at least a month or two longer with this particular payment dispute appeared to be the direction council was heading with Gardner reiterating his earlier motion to

Murder

(Continued from Page 7) report of an “unconscious and unresponsive female adult.”

Upon arrival, they found the body of Angammal Babu, 41, on the bed in the upstairs master bedroom.

The 911 call was placed by the defendant,

It was denied by a 3-2 vote, however, with Detrick, after a pause, firmly voting “no.” A motion was then made by one of the Republican councilmen to approve the bill’s list, with Detrick, after another pause, firmly stating, “Yes,” and with the subsequent motion having received three votes in the affirmative, the bill’s list was narrowly approved with Dasti’s bills approved for payment.

Detrick, while not revealing why he ultimately decided to break ranks with his Democratic colleagues, has had a legal career that spanned nearly 40 years before retiring from a local law practice in 2018.

“I am not opposed to paying anything,” said Gardner of his position. “I just want to make sure services are performed in the right order, and we are doing what is required.” who indicated to responding officers that his wife had taken a nap because she was tired.

An autopsy performed by Burlington County Medical Examiner Dr. Ian Hood, however, reportedly concluded that the manner of death was homicide, and the cause of death was due to compression of the victim’s neck.

The case against Natarajan will be prepared for presentation to a grand jury for possible indictment, the prosecutor’s office noted.

AUTOMOBILES/TRUCKS

Cash Paid for Your Car. Looking to buy better than junk cars. Call 1-866-261-5277. We come to you.

CA H PAID FOR YOUR CAR $

Hauling

Household appliances. Televisions, furniture, etc. for disposal or transport. Garage and yard cleanups along with lawn cutting and gutter cleaning. Free estimates. Call or Text Bob at 1-609-880-3789.

HOME HEALTH AIDE

Experienced certified home health aide. Companion and caregiver. References available. Call or text Cindy 609-227-9873.

Lawyers

Erwin Apell Attorney, Browns Mills. All legal matters - free hotline 24/7. Visa, Mastercard. Call 609-220-3059 or email Erwinapell@gmail.com .

Furniture Repair

Adam’s Furniture Restoration, LLC. Fully insured. Furniture repair, kitchen cabinet refinishing, touch-ups, and in-home services. Call 1-856-979-6210. Visit www.facebook. com/adamsfurnres .

Spring Cleanups

Spring cleanups, lawn cutting, and gutter cleaning. Shrub pruning and some tree work, along with hauling. Free estimates=reasonable rates. Call or Text Bob at 1-609-880-3789.