The Demolition of 109 E. Main Street: Part II

At the April 17, 2018 Commission meeting the demolition of 109 E. Main Street was discussed by the public and the commissioners. The commissioners asked the auditor to answer citizens’ questions. That’s not his job. The auditor’s role is that of a watchdog. He is to examine the financial records of the city looking for any irregularities, discrepancies, omissions or violation of the law. Parent stated over and over that Mr. Cesaro was his friend. Commissioner Parent’s friend should not be auditing the city’s finances, an independent, nonbiased auditor should. How can Mr. Cesaro now objectively look at the financial records of the city and evaluate their compliance and accuracy, if he made the recommendations. This is like the old story of the fox guarding the hen house.

The City is paying a lot of money to the Chief Financial Officer, the Purchasing agent and the City Solicitor. Why was the auditor advising the city how to fund the demolition, how to vote, whether public comments were allowed, and whether the demolition was an emergency? Commissioner Parent as the Director of Revenue and Finance with many years of experience on the Commission should know the process.

Even though Santiago had taken it upon himself to unilaterally enter into an oral/illegal contract with Perryman Excavating and even though Perryman Excavating had already submitted bills for preparatory work, a resolution was introduced to hire Perryman Excavating. Commissioner Udalovas opposed the resolution and stated her reasons:

"While I understand and respect the role of each of our personnel …., I cannot grasp the rationale of our legal representation to allow the situation to progress without considering the welfare of our city's finances and accountability to its taxpayers," She said she had asked for additional estimates and invoices on March 26th. She also stated: “It is my evaluation that the contracting of services in this case has not followed the due process necessary to uphold the fiscal accountability of the Commissioners to the taxpayers of Millville.” 

Despite Commissioner Udalovas’ comments and the fact it is her department, Santiago, Parent, and Cooper voted yes. Commissioner Udalovas voted no. Commissioner Pepitone was absent.

The $1.5 million to pay for the demolition was taken from surplus, which had been built up to a healthy $8.9 million by the last Commission. Santiago’s team had already taken $6 million from that surplus to fund all of its new spending and salary increases while avoiding a tax increase so only $1.4 million is left. Such a low surplus fund may cause the City’s credit rating to go down which will be very costly when the City borrows money.

Unfortunately the budget passed 4-0, which was the number required to pass. The budget vote needs 2/3rds not just a simple majority. Commissioner Udalovas had it within her power to stop the illegal Perryman contract. If she had voted no on the budget it would not have passed and she could have insisted that the budget be amended to exclude the money for the Perryman contract. The Commission would then be forced to seek additional bids in order to award the contract legally and competitively. By voting yes, the city now has appropriated the money to pay the $1.5 million demolition bill. You can be sure the experienced politicians and staff in the room Tuesday night were not going to explain her options to her. Hopefully Commissioner Udalovas will continue to be a voice for the citizens of Millville and seek some independent advice on the tough questions.

So what could $1.5 million dollars do for the city of Millville?

            1.The city could demolish the old Wheaton Factory, the Fath building,                       and the old rescue squad building.

            2.The city could demolish 100 derelict houses.

            3.The city could purchase a building for the police athletic league.

            4.The city could reduce taxes by 10 cents.        

During the meeting Santiago said, "We understand that many are anxious about seeing the building come down as we are. In a perfect world, the building would have been down already, and we would have been moving on to the next stages of the project." This statement makes one wonder what the next stage of the “project” is and whether this was all about some bigger plan the citizens are not being told about. Could it be that the real end game here is to put a new police building on High and Main Streets? This end game takes one of the best commercial corners in the City and turns it into another tax-exempt downtown building. That is just not smart for economic development or business.