Grand Theft Y-Gate
It is a terrible thing to watch two revered and trusted
institutions – the Westerly YMCA and the Charlestown Land Trust – debase
themselves by attempting to perpetrate a fraud on Charlestown taxpayers.
For months, Progressive Charlestown has covered the attempt
by the Y and the Land Trust to bilk taxpayers out of hundreds of thousands of
dollars for a worthless conservation easement on that rural junkyard, the Y’s
abandoned campground on Watchaug Pond. Click here for all the coverage.
We provided you with every document as it emerged and
concluded that Y-Gate was a terrible deal for taxpayers. It turns out that we did not have
all the facts. Indeed, more information came out at Monday’s Town
Council meeting that shows that the Y-Gate scam is even worse than we have
been reporting.
The only good news is that it now seems likely that Charlestown taxpayers
will get the chance to vote to end this scandal, one way or the other.
Even after Monday night’s bombshell revelations, the basic
framework of the Y-Gate scam remain the same – Charlestown taxpayers are being asked to pay
the Charlestown Land Trust for a worthless conservation easement so the Land
Trust can buy an over-priced, abandoned campground from the Westerly YMCA.
For some reason, a majority of our Town Council members not
only think this is OK but is actually a good deal.
What emerged Monday night was the extent to which the
Charlestown Land Trust has been playing fast and loose with the numbers – and
even more evidence about how naïve our town leaders are.
First, the numbers. Readers may recall that last year, after
killing a perfectly nice conservation development proposed by the YMCA and Ted
Veazey, the YMCA found new partners in the Charlestown Land Trust and
Sonquipaug Association to turn their abandoned campground into a source of
profit.
Instead of a deal where Veazey would have used his own money
to build ten nice homes that would have added to the town’s tax base, the new
plan called for the land to be bought through a combination of state DEM grant
funds and private fund-raising by the Land Trust.
But, oops, by the end of the year, the
private fund-raising pledge by the Land Trust disappeared, replaced by a scheme
to make Charlestown
taxpayers give the Land Trust the money to make the purchase.
In February, the Town Council voted to spend $475,000 on a
conservation easement from the Land Trust which would then take the town money
and the DEM grant and pay the Westerly YMCA $730,000.
Dr. Jack Donoghue filed suit to block that transaction based
on glaring violations of the state Open Meetings Act. Had it not been for Dr. Donoghue’s lawsuit, Charlestown would have already shelled out
$475,000, as Forrester Safford pointed out at Monday's meeting. Dr. Donoghue, by the way, has since declared his candidacy for
the Town Council.
Dr. Donoghue’s lawsuit bought time to dig deeper into the
documents. Among those documents was an appraisal commissioned at some point by
the Land Trust.
But unlike the Charlestown Town Council, the DEM was
unwilling to accept a bogus appraisal. They ordered a new one or else they
would not release the $367,000 grant they had approved.
Reluctantly, the Charlestown Land Trust finally did a new
appraisal. According to CLT Treasurer Russ Ricci, this appraisal used more
realistic conditions. We won’t know whether this is true until we actually see that appraisal. Based on Ricci’s
past representations on this subject, why should anyone believe his claims
about what’s in the new appraisal?
The new appraisal figure is $412,000, not the $730,000 figure in
the earlier bogus appraisal. Because the appraisal is so much lower now, DEM has cut its grant funding from $367,000 to $206,000.
But even that $412,000 appraisal figure is questionable.
Former Council member Forrester Safford stepped to the speaker’s podium and
identified three prime, south of One, waterfront properties that totaled more than 30 acres and noted that the
valuation on these three properties – all true, unspoiled open space and not
junked up land – in absolutely prime locations was just over $200,000. He challenged the new $412,000 price tag for
the 27.5 acres of junked-up campground based on the results of his research.
But the $412,000 appraisal is not the actual price for the
land. The Westerly YMCA wants $600,000 on this land that is now appraised at
$412,000. That’s a 46% mark-up.
Now, two comments on the Y’s demand for $600,000 on a
property appraised at $412,000.
- When confronted with a similar disparity between appraised price and asking price for the controversial 81 acres of land owned by Larry LeBlanc, the Council decided there was no way the town could justify paying more than a point or two above the appraisal value. This, despite the fact that LeBlanc’s 81 acres are almost unspoiled open space strategically spanning a long stretch of the moraine along Route One and is the site proposed for a number of unpopular, undesirable land uses that would ruin the scenic highway.
- What Charlestown homeowner owning a piece of property appraised at $412,000 would expect to be able to sell that property for $600,000? In today’s real estate market, the idea of getting 46% above appraisal is insane. What real estate agent in his or her right mind would even take the listing? Even if you get that much over the appraisal price, what bank would issue a mortgage on that amount?
Oh, and it doesn’t stop there.
 |
| Forrester put some uncomfortable questions to Russ Ricci |
Ricci disputed claims that there are health hazards or
contaminants on the site. He said they had engineers walking that site many
times and they never found any toxic hazards. He disputed whether those old
buildings contained lead paint or asbestos.
But if Ricci has had professionals assess the environmental
hazards on the site, where are their
reports? The appraiser
who produced the fairy tale appraisal explicitly said that he did not examine the inside of the buildings for hazards and
that, even if he did, he was not
qualified to assess environmental problems. He did note in his
report that the condition of the buildings was poor.
And we know the buildings are old. We also know that old
buildings like that frequently were painted with lead paint and used
asbestos-bearing materials in their construction.
Before we can believe Ricci’s blithe claims that there are
no hazards on that site, let him produce
the reports from those engineers he claims have walked the site – and don’t
forget to include their credentials to assess toxic hazards.
The question of whether to put this matter before the voters
– including when to do it and how to do it – will be the topic of a second July
Town Council meeting on July 23 to address this and other left-over business from the July 9
meeting.
Many, many more questions about the Y-Gate scam remain - including new ones arising from the remarkable revelations made during last Monday's meeting. It is, frankly, baffling how the Town Council can even consider sending this boondoggle to the voters with so many solved mysteries and contradictory statements.
Many, many more questions about the Y-Gate scam remain - including new ones arising from the remarkable revelations made during last Monday's meeting. It is, frankly, baffling how the Town Council can even consider sending this boondoggle to the voters with so many solved mysteries and contradictory statements.
Between now and then, we’ll see if more actual documents get
released or whether townspeople will be required to, as Councilor Gregg Avedisian put it, “find the answers for yourselves”
about this terrible deal for Charlestown taxpayers. Click here to read the Westerly Sun's coverage - the quote appears as the last line in the article.
To be continued with more on how a town vote would work and
what other options are available to the town to resolve Y-Gate…