JACKSON- Township residents aren’t shy about what is bothering them and asking questions during Township Council meetings.
The public comment period at one recent meeting had 11 residents come before the microphone to provide their input about a variety of township topics.
Among those who spoke was resident Donny Adelman, who is a regular speaker at meetings. He brought up an internal police matter between himself and the department and played a recording of an exchange that suggested information about him was released improperly.
Council President Mordechai Burnstein said it would be improper for the Council to comment on a police matter. He told Adelman “if you feel the police are not doing what they are supposed to do there is a process in place to file a report with the (Ocean County) Prosecutor’s Office.”
Township Attorney Gregory McGuckin said an individual making such a complaint would first have to go “through the internal affairs process whether you want to or not. That is where the initial complaint has to go.” He said that Adelman could file a complaint with the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office as it oversees the internal affairs department of Jackson Township.
Resident Joseph Sullivan, who serves as vice chair on the township planning board and chairs the Rent Levelling Board, spoke about the Council’s examination of when the public comment period might be held. There has been consideration of moving it earlier during council meetings.
Sullivan said he’d prefer to have it after the business of council was conducted and post council reports “but I’ve seen it work either way in many communities but my personal preference is to have public comments at the end of the meeting.”
Resident Nick Moccio reminded the mayor and council that his best friend Mortimer Wortman was still missing. “It is still clear to me and it is clearer every single day that this town can do so much more to locate its missing residents.” He said he had been assured by the council president and mayor that the police are doing everything they can to find him.
Moccio played a recording of a conversation with Burnstein who indicated to that due to legal issues between the former police chief and township at the time that the police had asked the official “not to contact a search and rescue squad. What more will you do to ensure that Mortimer Wortman is located and what will you do to repair the mistakes of your police department?”
“You are aware of your shortcomings and the shortcomings of your law enforcement. Mortimer Wortman is still missing. It has been 68 days and we still have no answers,” Moccio said.
Burnstein replied that he had referenced a volunteer organization that did great work. “I definitely do agree that the township could continue to do more. I think since the last meeting the township has done a little more. I think the results we’re looking for is obviously to find Mortimer. I am not in the position to instruct the police on how to do their job.”
McGuckin backed up Burnstein’s statement saying it was not the Council’s role to tell the police department how to do their job. “As to how they do their police function their boss is the Ocean County Prosecutor and ultimately the Attorney General of the state of New Jersey.” He advised the resident that if he felt that the township police department was doing something wrong in relation to this criminal investigation to report it to the county prosecutor’s office.
Moccio said the case was to be headed by the Prosecutor’s Office and that Jackson’s Police Department was to have handed off their initial police report to them and that at the time he spoke to the Prosecutor’s Office, that had not been done yet.
McGuckin did say a letter could be written on behalf of the mayor and council to the Prosecutor’s Office asking for an update on the investigation. Mayor Jennifer Kuhn said she would authorize such a letter to be sent.
Councilman Christopher Pollak thanked Moccio for “talking about the issue. I think we all agree we should have done more from the beginning and we admit to that and we are trying. I look at this case and I am like ‘what the hell happened?’ It’s surprising. It’s shocking and it shouldn’t be. I am a big supporter of the police. I am looking at this case and nothing looks good to me.”
Resident Anna Marie Sgroi sought clarification on a new regulation. She has properties rented out to two young families in 60 Acres and asked about the new safety inspection fee.
“I was told when I called about the registration that there was no staff for this and not to worry about it.” Later, she was told by a neighbor that this wasn’t the case and she should go to town hall and pay the fee.
In talking to the code enforcement office, she was told she needed to pay the fee but there wouldn’t be an inspection as the township lacked the staff to conduct it.
“I said doesn’t that sound ridiculous that I am going to pay $100 for an inspection that actually is not going to happen,” Sgroi said. She got the same message when she came to town hall, to pay the fee but that the inspection wouldn’t be performed.
She was told later that someone would do the inspection but that it couldn’t be scheduled yet but she could pay the fee in advance. “This seems kind of weird. I’m all for the inspections and getting rid of these bad landlords. I’m just confused why I am paying $100 and for what?”
Burnstein apologized for the employee not providing accurate information and said the township business administrator would address that. He also said that housing inspectors were being interviewed. “We have over 150 applications and resumes,” Burnstein said.
He added the $100 fee would be going toward paying the salaries of those in this new department, the Bureau of Housing and Safety. He said in future years once the fee is paid an inspection will be scheduled at that time.
