OPINION: Belmar Residents Contest 'Unpopular' $7M Pavilion Bond For Second Time

Taxpayers Want A Say – and They Want Answers

For the second time in less than a year the voters of Belmar have spoken and they’re making it clear they want to be heard.   A petition asking that the Belmar Ordinance approving a $7 million dollar bond to rebuild two beachfront pavilions damaged by Superstorm Sandy be put on the ballot for a vote was delivered to the borough administrator on Tuesday, May 27, 2014.  The petition bore more than the requisite number of voter signatures to trigger a referendum.

 Earlier this month the Belmar Borough Council, led by Mayor Matthew Doherty, voted to borrow $7 million to fund the new beach pavilions.  They ignored the objections of a number of residents who pleaded to be heard.  One of the primary objections is that the council has rebuffed repeated requests for a pro forma accounting of how the $7 million would be made back … and then repaid.  The fear is that the burden will fall on taxpayers.

 “We have asked this mayor and council for at least a year to show us the money,” said Noreen Dean, who signed the petition.  “All we’re asking for is a balance sheet that will show the money they anticipate coming in and how that money will, in turn, pay back such a large debt.  It’s just basic accounting and they won’t give Belmar taxpayers that courtesy.”  We’re supposed to just trust them.

 Another difficult issue surrounding the repayment of any bond is the apportionment of funds between taxpayer monies and those coming from  Belmar’s beach utility.  Residents of Belmar sued the town after the mayor and Council approved a similar ordinance last September to borrow $7.5M to rebuild the pavilions using only money collected through the beach utility account.  The lawsuit argued against the legality of using funds which are dedicated by state law to be used solely to maintain and run the beachfront.  Last November Monmouth County Superior Court Judge Lawrence Lawson ordered the borough to stay the start of construction until this issue was settled.  The borough reacted by rescinding the original bond. 

 May 6, 2014 the council introduced a new, general obligation bond that didn’t rely on the beach utility or Sandy-related flood insurance to fund it. That is what has taxpayers worried.

“The mayor and council want to make this seem like a partisan political fight, but it’s not.  It’s a financial concern.  They say those of us who support the petition are against recovery.  We are not against recovery.  But we are against an irresponsible recovery.  We live here and we love it here and we want Belmar to be the best it can be.  We just don’t want a financial burden that could potentially crush us.” said Katrina Clapsis, who helped circulate the petition. “Even Judge Lawson, in his initial decision, said he feared the burden might fall on Belmar’s taxpayers.

The town has 20 days to authenticate and respond to the voters’ petition.  And if the taxpayers have their way, they’ll decide this issue at the ballot box in November.

LETTER ADDRESSED TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL

June 6, 2014

Mayor Matthew Doherty and Council Members

Borough of Belmar

600 Main Street

Belmar, NJ  07719

Dear Mayor and Council Members,

On behalf of the Committee of Petitioners for the Referendum Petition in Protest of the Adoption of Bond Ordinance No. 2014-07 certified by Belmar Clerk April Claudio.  I ask that you respond to our proposal  publicly stated during the June 4, 2014 Council meeting to enter into an agreement to waive the time limitations and special election requirement according to NJ Statute and schedule the referendum question on the November 4, 2014 general election ballot at zero cost to the Borough, versus the costs of $20,000 for a special election.

Kindly respond so that we may contact counsel and have the appropriate agreement prepared.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Very truly yours,

Vincent  T. Ehmann,Jr.

1218 Oakwood Road, Belmar, NJ 07719

cc:  Mr. Michael  DuPont, Esq.