As more and more Residents learn more about the huge “dual-kitchen”, outrageously expensive Votee “Field House” just approved by Teaneck’s Council (12/12/2018)
they are asking:
1) When did that design get approved – who from Town worked on it – what possible justification is there for its size and cost?
2) Why didn’t the public know what was happening on this project? Where was the transparency and opportunity for input the public and taxpayers deserves?

The answer to the second – the transparency – question is quite simple:
Your Teaneck public officials have been working very hard to make sure you did not know
– since? Since 2010 when the basic design was first drawn by Architect Gianforcaro as requested by ….. (not known)!
– 2010 was a year even before Gianforcaro had even his first of three no bid contracts with the Township – to study Votee drainage.

But let’s start with what happened in 11 months since January 2018 – and work our way back

The bids for the Field House construction contract – estimated by the architect to cost $.8 to 1.2M were opened on March 15, 2018 —
The lowest bid was @1.5M – not including design and oversight costs. CouncIl had only set aside $1.275M for the whole project
Even the existence of the facility’s specifications had were mentioned publicly in only one QUICK sentence in the 2/1/2018 Manager’s end of the meeting VERBAL report
The Manager simply announced that the bid specs would be open to bidders on Sunday, February 4, 2018
Not explained was the fact that:
the specifications has been completed for delivery to the Township on January 8, 2018
that design was not being shared in any public context or with the Council prior to the release to bidders on February 4
And to have any actual copy of the Specs, one would have to drive to Chester (one hour away) and pay

Who had seen the evolving design after Architect Gianforcaro was given his “Rest Room and Concession Building” design contract on July 19, 2016 – 1/1/2 years earlier – before his specs went to bidders?  When did the project become a “Field House” – and who decided on the name change?
So far as can be determined, no public body of any sort had seen or heard what Gianforcaro was doing since the day he got the contract on July 19, 2016  — which was also the day the Township cut a check to him for 1/3 of his entire contract amount.
Wait – who was guiding/tracking his design and its substantial changes?
It was NOT the two key advisory board (Parks, Playgrounds and Recreation. or the Municipal Open Space Committee – although MOST funds have been being used to pay the Gianforcaro contract
 and, unbelievably – NOT shared with either the Teaneck Junior Soccer League leadership and or the Township Council neither of which reportedly had received no reports for the entire 1&1/12 years of the Gianforcaro contract.
Wait – the Junior Soccer League was kept in the dark?  Just watch/listen to what is representative told Council on the night the Council approved the low bid contract – click here
(To be sure, Mr. Gianforcaro had mentioned on the day (7/2016) he was given the contract that there existed an unnamed “design group” or “design committee”. Its membership has not even today been identified)

But wait – let’s go back to the day the bids were opened — on Tuesday March 13, 2018.  Were the bid results publicly reported? No. Not until 265 days later (December 7 in the Council agenda packet)
Why the wait? – well that is a REALLY good question – And clearly raises questions about the land use rules competence of our Town.

You see – 8 days, even before the bids were opened March 13, the Township engineer had been asked on March 5 by the State (Green Acres) about the Town’s plans for the pavilion facility.The question came from GA’s Bergen County Steward. Then a week later – after receiving plans and bid specification information from Teaneck’s engineer, she wrote again to ask more specifically about the project because Votee is parkland, some of which is even Green Acres funded, State regulations require a process to see whether the entire project was allowable and, most importantly, would in any event require a very specific public review process since the facility would represent a “change of use” click here. That process would have allowed everyone in town 1) be given all relevant information and attend a well-announced public meeting.
|And note- since the result of the State review and the open public meeting could well have required changes in design (big and small), clearly the Architect and the Town officialdom should already have known the entire set of State issues and they should should have been worked out with Green Acres (and the County, as well) BEFORE the bids specs were completed and sent out!
Instead of delaying the bid opening to at least explore the issues the State was raising, the Town went ahead.   (Why that happened and under whose say so remains a mystery).
So — But then an extraordinary series of emails between the State and the Township were exchanged – and did not end until October 24.  It i a possible interpretation for why the Township attorney fought so hard NOT to have a public “change of use” meeting was to make sure the pubic did not know ALL that has come to light about this project and the  very predictable public negative reaction.

You can see this entire exchange between Green Acres & Township by clicking here. But note, Green Acres stopped pressing the Township about the change of use public meeting NOT because the meeting was not required, but because Green Acres has no authority to penalize the Township for not holding it.

OK – now let’s step back to March 2018 – and try to see how this project was allowed to go forward.  To do so, go to this additional Teaneck Transparency post at click here