Split council rejects $600K for parking lot
Dems, GOP battle over land purchase next to H.R. building
BY MICHAEL ACKER Staff Writer
Two months after voting to acquire property for a parking lot next to the South River Human Resources building, a borough councilman has shifted gears, effectively terminating the $600,000 project.

"The people in town are not into this. We know this from our campaigning." - John Krenzel

"As far as I'm concerned, at this point, the deal is dead," Republican Councilman John Krenzel said. "I looked it over and the more I looked at it, the less I liked it."

The council had voted 4-2 in July, with Krenzel in support, to go ahead with the purchase of 51 Reid St. for the purpose of providing parking spaces for the newly opened borough Human Resources building next door. Krenzel said he broke from his two party mates at the time because he believed that the parking was needed for safety reasons. He stressed that he did not agree with the way the project was handled.

At the time, the cost estimate for the land and work on the parking lot was $550,000, with the borough receiving most of that money in the form of a grant.

Last week, when it came time to vote on the bond ordinance, which now totaled $600,000, Krenzel voted against it, causing a 3-3 tie along party lines. A council majority is needed to approve the bonds in order to protect the borough from litigation, so Democratic Mayor Robert Szegeti could not break the tie.

The Human Resources building at 55 Reid St., which houses the Office on Aging and borough recreation offices, has split the council along party lines for years. Republicans opposed the project, which was completed in 2006, citing inadequate parking and the rising cost of the project.

The purchase of 51 Reid St., which is vacant, would allow the council to add to the 14 parking spaces currently available at the Human Resources building. Szegeti has said the purchase would have resulted in 24 new parking spaces, plus two stalls for the Office on Aging buses that transport seniors to the facility.

Borough Business Administrator Andrew Salerno said at the Aug. 27 council meeting that the $600,000 cost estimate included the cost of acquisition, improvement to the property, rebuilding fees, as well as contingency and soft costs. Salerno noted that the ordinance up for adoption at the meeting was to authorize debt for the work.

Krenzel said the assumptions being made in the auditor's memorandum were driving the cost of the project "way up."

Borough Attorney Frederick Roselli said $290,000 is needed to purchase the property, but $300,000 was estimated for soft costs, title and additional fees. The inflated number allows for flexibility in the event of an unforeseen problem, such as asbestos being found in a building during demolition.

Szegeti said that whatever debt is not used by the end of the project would be cancelled. He added that if the council did not allow for this level of flexibility for the project, it could create more costs as the work begins.

"So you are creating more costs by doing that," Szegeti said.

Krenzel responded, saying that the level of flexibility is excessive. He added that he remained unconvinced by the figures provided for the project.

"It seems like it's an awful lot of money," Krenzel said.

Republican Councilman Raymond Eppinger said that while the project's purpose is to offer visitors to the Human Resources building more parking, the plan would result in the loss of two streetside parking spots in front of the property. With that in mind, he estimated that the cost is roughly $28,000 per parking space, which is $6,000 greater than originally planned.

After the council effectively voted down the bonds, Democratic Council President David Sliker expressed disappointment that the borough will not be taking advantage of $500,000 in grant money for the project. He said the town faces potential litigation for not staying with the commitment to purchase the property.

"There could be legal ramifications since the bond did not pass," Sliker said.

While the council cannot know how much the project is going to cost until it goes out to bid, Krenzel said, the amount of money left for contingencies was excessive. The cost of the project could have been lowered by $40,000 and it still would have had an adequate amount of money for contingencies, he added.

Democratic Borough Councilman Anthony Razzano said he and his partymates were willing to scale back the estimates.

"[Krenzel] has a concern about the extra money, in case anything goes wrong," Razzano said, "and even if scaled back, even if it is only a few dollars, that is fine. He told us that he still is not going to vote for it."

"He opened us up to a major lawsuit and he knows it," Razzano added. "He is an attorney."

Krenzel said residents are concerned that the Democrats initially said parking would be adequate for the facility, but they then pursued this property for additional parking.

"The people in town are not into this," Krenzel said. "We know this from our campaigning."

Razzano said the Democrats still believe that parking is adequate at the Human Resources building, but this is an opportunity to acquire property for additional parking, since the Republicans raised concerns about the issue.

"It goes to show that you can't trust the Republicans to keep their word," Razzano added, "because he voted for it for the safety and the wellness of seniors, and because of a few dollars, he is throwing the safety and well-being of seniors to the wind."

Krenzel also raised concerns that the existing and proposed parking spaces are too small.

"They're going to be the same size as they are now," Krenzel said. "… My [Chevy] Malibu barely makes it. How do you open the door? We are not following the rules and regulations for size of the lot."

Razzano accused the Republicans of politicizing the issue. He said the cost Eppinger cited per parking space is standard for any parking lot, and the sizes of the parking spaces at the Human Resources building meet the standards of the New Jersey Department of Transportation and the American with Disabilities Act.

"After the original meeting, when [Krenzel] voted for the resolution to buy the property, he told me that he committed himself to buying it and I congratulated him for his courage, because he did take some heat for it," Razzano said. "The Republicans constantly complain about parking on Reid Street, but not one of them, as usual, has come up with a solution."

The seller of the vacant property may seek litigation, Krenzel said, but he thinks the seller may be happier selling the land to a private entity for more money.

"According to [the seller's] appraisal, the house is worth more than the town is willing to pay for it," Krenzel said. "Therefore, they should be able to get more money."

Razzano took issue with Krenzel's assertion that the seller would get more money from another buyer.

"I think that they would get as much or around that same amount, so it would preclude the lawsuit," Razzano said. "I'm in the business. I know what those kinds of houses are going up for … We gave them a fair price.