Skip to content


The numbers just don’t add up!

Central to both sides’ arguments about what we should pay to build the pavilions is the $3.6 million that FEMA is supposed to supply.  Even opponents of the $7 million bond plan to use the $3.6 million we’ve been repeatedly told we were going to get.

Nobody had any reason to doubt it.  It wasn’t presented as a guess but as an actual fact.  Below we see the mayor’s funding plan from one of the “Vote yes” advertisements:

Cost breakdown

It’s not “approximately $3.6 million” and it’s not “we hope to get.”  It’s “$3,677,766” and it’s “approved”.

Councilman Jim Bean recently found some information on the state’s FEMA website about the status of our FEMA claims and contacted Congressman Chris Smith’s office to have that information confirmed.  It certainly calls the accuracy of that number into question.  He prepared some documents to present this information to the Council Tuesday night and copies were also handed out to the public.  See the 1:32:30 mark of the meeting tape.  The mayor and administrator’s reactions to this information doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence.

FEMA settlement

This sheet has the pavilion claims broken out:

FEMA settlement FEMA for pavilions

Well, you say, maybe it’s true that there’s more money in the pipeline.  Doesn’t look that way:

Screen Shot 2014-08-06 at 5.47.57 AM

Here are the pavilion claims in detail:

Screen Shot 2014-08-06 at 4.54.42 AM

Worth noting is that #4533 shows our anticipated insurance reimbursement as $414,000 not $484,000 as claimed in the “vote yes” flyers.

So we have a $850,000 problem with the FEMA money, a $70,000 problem with the insurance money and it’s still highly questionable if we’re going to be allowed to use the $727,000 buy-a-board money to help fund the taxpayer portion of the bond.

On top of that, there’s also a possibility of change orders driving up the cost beyond the $7 million.

This whole thing is a monstrosity.  You’d have to be crazy to vote for this.



  1. guest wrote:

    I was on the fence until I watched the last council meeting and reviewed the actual obligations on the FEMA website. I will be voting “no” now. As one commenter stated during the meeting, “you can’t argue the facts.”

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 8:03 am | Permalink
  2. Teddy Ehmann wrote:

    The online Local Finance Board meeting to approve the $7 Mil. Bond, May 2,2014,
    Colleen under oath in response to Director Neff, testified insurance reimbursement of $500, 000.. So Joy and everyone don’t have the facts, the accounting. That is an &86,0000. difference. Go to NJ Local Finance Board 2014 Schedule, click on 5/2 meeting minutes.

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 8:27 am | Permalink
  3. MATH WOMEN wrote:

    An example of the NEW math???

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 9:05 am | Permalink
  4. Richard Parker wrote:

    Talk About Inflation!
    I remember last fall when the Mayor passed a bond for $7.5 million. That was for a two story Taylor ( sorry John Taylor) pavilion and the same 10th Ave ( sorry Howard Howland Safety) pavilion. So what’s up with that?

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 9:57 am | Permalink
  5. Anonymous wrote:

    Cost for decks, ramps, railings, etc. What the hell is etc ?! That can mean anything and it seems expensive.

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 8:11 pm | Permalink
  6. admin wrote:

    They did that to make it seem like the buildings themselves were not that expensive and that the “no” people were failing to account for the additional costs.

    Thursday, August 7, 2014 at 8:24 pm | Permalink
  7. MATH WOMEN wrote:

    Why can they do math better in Avon?

    Friday, August 8, 2014 at 7:08 am | Permalink
  8. Guest wrote:

    Maybe they are not a crooked in Avon??

    Friday, August 8, 2014 at 9:43 am | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.