JACKSON – The Township has less than 30 days to respond to a complaint filed recently by a former township employee. The litigation alleges various violations and names Mayor Michael Reina and Business Administrator Terence Wall.
An article posted by FAA News, a website covering Jackson, Lakewood, Toms River and Manchester, reported the filing of the lawsuit which accused Mayor Reina of having coerced building inspectors to look away from his friends.
That story also names Administrator Wall and developer Vito Cardinale. The lawsuit was filed in Ocean County Superior Court by Kevin Schmalz, who was Jackson’s plumbing inspector and sub-code official until October 2022. It alleges violations of the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act (“CEPA”).
Described as a whistleblower lawsuit that reveals allegations of massive collusion between Mayor Reina and prominent developers in the township, the litigation alleges that Reina and Wall repeatedly coerced the Township’s building inspectors to “look away” for his important friends, and openly threatened to terminate their employment if they did not comply with what they demanded.
Wall responded to the complaint and told The Jackson Times, “The Township absolutely disputes the allegations of this former employee and will vigorously defend itself in court. We are confident the actual facts regarding this plaintiff will be clearly established in that forum.”
According to the complaint, Schmalz started his employment in Jackson in the position of Plumbing Inspector on January 2, 2001 and in 2005, he also became the Sub-Code Official.
The Township issued a major approval to Vito Cardinale of Cardinale Enterprises in 2019 to develop Adventure Crossing. The reported $500 million Adventure Crossing project is located between Route 195 and Six Flags Great Adventure, and was planned to consist of a 120,000 square foot sports dome, two hotels, eight outdoor sports fields, a 100,000 square foot recreational building with a trampoline park, indoor go-kart racing, a venue for video game competitions, a convenience store and restaurants, including a Popeyes restaurant and Taco Bell.
When the Adventure Crossing project began, Schmalz and other building officials were allegedly instructed by Township officials, including Reina and Wall, to prioritize and expedite all inspections, reviews and approvals of plans and permits for the project.
The lawsuit that Schmalz filed alleges that he and other building officials were harassed and even threatened with termination of employment if they did not approve certain applications, plan reviews and permits for the project without question and in some cases, in clear violation of the Uniform Construction Code (UCC).
Brent O’Connor was hired by the municipality in February 2021 to serve as its Construction Official and he received directives from the Township to prioritize and expedite plan reviews and the issuance of permits for the project, according to the suit. The suit states that there were instances when the issuance of permits was not warranted and in violation of the UCC.
According to the suit, the Township as well as Reina and Wall, regularly took orders and directive from the developer, including directives that were not compliant with the UCC or other laws, and attempted to direct and coerce officials within the Building Department to act unlawfully.
The suit also states that Township officials introduced new ordinances and amended existing ordinances to lessen construction permit fees for the developer on structure types that were being built at the project, including the permit fees for domes and warehouses.
Building officials would regularly object and even refuse to participate in requests from the developer, general contractors and Township officials that they believed were unlawful. Cited was an example where during one meeting, the developer offered to hire its own private inspectors to issue COs or TCOs (certificates of occupancy or temporary ones) so that it no longer had to go through Jackson’s Building Department.
In another meeting, the developer allegedly offered to provide the Township a “hold harmless” letter that it explained could allow the developer and general contractor to build without appropriate permits or open with appropriate COs or TCOs but that the Township could hold the developer responsible for any liability that arose from the project.
The suit noted an example of dome construction that started without first obtaining the necessary permits, including permits required for the underground electrical work. Another example was the construction of a warehouse starting without the required inspections being completed or issuance of a permit.
O’Connor met regularly with the Township’s administration as work progressed and with the developer. During these meetings, the developer and Township officials would complain that the Building Department was not issuing permits when they wanted them to and O’Connor responded that the Building Department must follow the law and the only reason why permits would not be issued was because they could not be issued in accordance with the UCC and other applicable law.
The officials and developer received repeated explanations during these meetings from O’Connor regarding the permitting process that is governed by law. O’Connor informed Schmalz of these meetings and that they were under increased pressure from the developer and Township to issue permits in violation of the UCC and he was threatened that he, Schmalz and others in the Building Department would be fired if they did not go along with these directives, according to the suit.
