The Solbergs may sue Readington Township over the interpretive statement to appear on the ballot of the special election May 16, according to a letter sent by an attorney for the Solbergs to the township attorney and clerk late Monday.
"We believe it visits an injustice upon the voting public because it exceeds its fundamental purpose of being purely ‘interpretive,’" said the letter, which the Solbergs provided. "The statement as written is biased, argumentative, confusing and untruthful."
The letter ends with a request for Readington Township Attorney Sharon Dragan to contact Angelo Genova of the firm Genova, Burns & Vernoia by the close of business today with Readington’s reply "to avoid the prospect of litigation." Genova’s name and a signature follow.
Neither Dragan nor Genova returned calls seeking comment yesterday.
In the special election, the public will vote on the township committee’s proposal to borrow up to $22 million for acquisition or preservation of the 76-acre Solberg Airport and 650 acres of surrounding land. The airport is owned by siblings Thor Solberg, Lorraine Solberg and Suzanne Solberg Nagle.
Edward McManimon, an attorney with McManimon & Scotland LLC -- the township’s bond counsel -- said Genova is "completely wrong" about the interpretive statement.
"I believe that the interpretive statement is simple, direct, accurate and to the point, and it has no editorializing, and it shouldn’t," said McManimon.
He said he wrote a letter and gave it to both Dragan and the township clerk by way of response. In the letter, McManimon said he advised the Solbergs’ attorney of the definition of a bond ordinance and gave information about applicable budgetary and bond laws.
Committee members Julia Allen and Frank Gatti have said the interpretive statement was already drafted by the time the Solbergs’ made their first request to participate in the writing of it. Gatti said Mayor Gerard Shamey responded to Genova’s letter, but he did not share the contents of Shamey’s response. Shamey could not be reached for comment yesterday.
The interpretive statement now reads, "A ‘YES’ vote to ratify this ordinance would provide the funding needed to acquire various parcels of land, including the open space lands surrounding the airport, and the development rights on lands currently used by the airport, for a purchase price of not to exceed $22 million."
"A ‘NO’ vote would defeat the bond ordinance and not permit the Township to obtain the funds and acquire the property."
The use of the words "open space" in the interpretive statement is misleading, Thor Solberg said yesterday. Also misleading, he said, is the lack of a reference to eminent domain.
"If you’re borrowing $22 million to buy property that’s not for sale, there can only be one interpretation for that," Solberg said.
In a 30-second television spot that began airing on local cable Monday, Solberg says he hopes "people will say no to eminent domain and preserve the heritage we share and the open space we all enjoy."
Genova’s letter states, "Any interpretive statement that fails to mention ‘eminent domain’ is misleading, prejudicial and threatening to a free and fair election."
In addition, the $22 million figure is misleading because "in fact, there is no way of discerning exactly how much money it would cost to acquire those parcels of land the Township covets," Genova’s letter states.
The Solbergs’ proposed interpretive statement, as conveyed in Genova’s letter, reads as follows: "A ‘YES’ vote to ratify this ordinance would provide funding needed to acquire various parcels of land surrounding the airport, and development rights on lands currently used by the airport, through the use of eminent domain, for a purchase price of not to exceed $22 million."
"A ‘NO’ vote would defeat the bond ordinance and not permit the Township to acquire the property through the use of eminent domain."
McManimon said the insertion of "eminent domain" would be inappropriate. He emphasized the township committee has not passed an ordinance enabling it to acquire the land through eminent domain.
"In my view, since no decision’s been made on that and it’s certainly not being made in the bond ordinance, to suggest that they’re going to use eminent domain to acquire this property is inappropriate," McManimon said.
McManimon said a lawsuit alone would not prevent the May 16 referendum from going forward.
Jennifer Weiss works in the Hunterdon County bureau. She may be reached at jweiss@starledger.com or (908) 782-8326
Copyright © 2006 NJ.com
Date: April 26, 2006 Source: NJ.com
URL: http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/somerset/index.ssf?/base/news-1/11460311027720.xml&coll=1
