Mine area residents' treatment questioned

by Teresa Edmond
Staff Writer
October 15, 2008

RINGWOOD - Did displaced Upper Ringwood locals really want the borough to buy out their Van Dunk Lane homes, or did borough officials and attorneys strip them of their voice in this matter?

That’s the question swirling around the community as the borough works on its Small Cities Grant application for $400,000. This money would be earmarked to remedy a sinkhole consuming a Sheehan Drive property and to help out residents displaced from their homes because of surrounding sinkholes, borough officials said.

At the Oct. 2 Borough Council meeting, it was announced that the municipality is preparing a state grant application so the state Department of Community Affairs would consider forking over $400,000.

During this meeting, borough officials said the nearly two dozen displaced residents have been “in the loop” throughout their housing dilemma and that the residents asked for the borough to voluntarily buy out their houses, according to Borough Attorney Richard Clemack.

“We’d never go forward (without their consent) and try to steamroll people,” he said.

But one of the displaced residents, Roberta Mann, has a different story.

In a phone interview, Mann said that even though the displaced residents have legal representation in the Upper Ringwood Superfund site class action suit, her own tenant rights are not being represented at all. Ford Motor Co. contaminated Upper Ringwood soils with paint sludge in the 1960s and 1970s.

Mann is one of the nearly two dozen residents who were forced out of their two Van Dunk Lane houses around November 2006 when the borough discovered the two buildings stood on unstable ground as a result of the properties being located on mineshafts.

According to Clemack at the Oct. 2 meeting, White Plains, N.Y., attorney Kevin J. Madonna has been representing the ousted residents since January 2008, and that in January 2007, the residents had the option to go with the voluntary buyout of their properties.

Clemack also said that since the displaced residents were interested in a voluntary buyout, they and borough officials are working out a resolution with the mortgage companies, banks and insurance companies.

“There are lots of moving parts here,” Clemack said. “It may be successful, it may not be successful, but we have permission of the property owners.”

Mann said that although she can’t speak for the other displaced residents – not even her brother-in-law, who owns the 23 Van Dunk Lane home – a voluntary buyout would trap the members of her family in their temporary housing on Sheehan Drive. They would have nowhere else to live but on Sheehan Drive because of their “not so great” credit, Mann said.

But even though Mann wasn’t at the Oct. 2 council meeting, she knows borough officials couldn’t persuade her that these residents have had their say and are being protected.

“I think the borough is doing dirty business behind closed doors by not speaking to us, including my family,” she said. “We’ve been left out of everything that’s been happening. I find that I have tenant rights (which should be represented), and no one explained that to me before.”

As for the $400,000 Small Cities Grant, Mann is not getting her hopes up about municipality officials bailing her family out if they get the grant money.

“It’s been two years (since the residential displacement), and I’m still waiting to see that happen,” she said.

Skylands CLEAN Executive Director Robin O’Hearn said she was “troubled” to learn that the displaced residents were called down to Borough Hall to be presented buyout offers of their Van Dunk Lane houses despite the lack of funds in the municipality’s budget. Usually residents are updated on the Superfund site cleanup at CAG meetings.

“This seems very premature as the borough doesn’t yet have this money and inappropriate as the residents are not aware of their rights under this process,” she said.

Despite being “glad” to hear Clemack’s statement on Oct. 2, borough resident Anita Yarossi said she wants to hear the residents speak for themselves about whether anyone is standing up for their tenant rights.

“At the CAG meeting, it was pretty clear from the people there, who are now all of a sudden a part of this, that they were very confused and that they felt they weren’t being represented,” she said.

 Borough officials said they informed the Upper Ringwood residents about the Oct. 2 special council meeting to address the $400,000 Small Cities Grant application. But Mann said no official told her. Instead, she learned about it from Yarossi at the last CAG meeting.

The sinkhole
According to Clemack at the Oct. 2 council meeting, DeGroat spoke with borough officials on his own free will. DeGroat confirmed, in further detail, he did this in a separate phone interview.

According to DeGroat, he approached Clemack and Acting Borough Manager/Borough Clerk Kelley Rohde at Borough Hall last month about  remediating the sinkhole and possible alternative housing if remediation isn’t possible.

According to DeGroat, Clemack and Rohde told him they’re applying for at least $400,000 in grant money, but that money may not be directed toward remediating the sinkhole, according to DeGroat. He also said that Rohde suggested the sinkhole could be repaired for around $150,000 instead.

“I said if that could be done, I’m all for it, but we have to talk more about that because my insurance company might not want that,” DeGroat said.

 DeGroat said that if it comes down to his family moving out of his home because of the sinkhole, his family should be moved into a residence with a mortgage DeGroat could afford. Also, this alternative dwelling must be similar to the four-bedroom house on an acre of ground in the woods he has now.

 “They said they’ll comply with everything I asked for,” DeGroat said.

 At the Oct. 2 council meeting, Clemack said DeGroat’s plan was “very well thought out.”