Borough issues permits for school construction Prior lack of permits for project became a point of contention BY MICHAEL ACKER Staff Writer The Sayreville school district has received the permits needed to move ahead with the $47 million construction project at Sayreville War Memorial High School. Though the expansion project began last fall, it recently came to light that the borough's building department had not issued the proper permits for the work. Board President Michael Macagnone said the full permits arrived two weeks ago. "We anticipated that they would be there," he said. School Business Administrator Emidio D'Andrea said that phase one of the three-phase project has remained in progress thanks to the issuance of temporary permits. The only concern remaining for the board is the additional cost of firewalls and fire suppression elements, which were not in the original plan, D'Andrea said. The board's architect for the project, John J. Schnitzer, will submit revised plans with additional costs pertaining to the firewalls. Resident Barbara Kilcomons told the board last month that she does not think it should have to pay for additional fees associated with the firewalls, since Schnitzer admitted to the error of leaving it out in the original plan. "I don't think that the taxpayers of Sayreville should absorb [the cost] of his error," Kilcomons said. Macagnone agreed with Kilcomons' assessment, but said he wants to wait until the total cost figures come in before rendering a decision. "I have no allegiance to Mr. Schnitzer and his architectural firm," Macagnone told the Suburban. "My allegiance is with Sayreville." Macagnone said the borough's new construction official, Kirk Miick, made the right decision in issuing the permits so that the project can move ahead. "He is very responsible," Macagnone said. "He is a good guy to work with and he did the right thing." The state Department of Community Affairs is currently investigating the permit process undergone last year. At the same time, the borough's former code official, Michael Gianotto, faces disciplinary charges and another construction office employee has resigned. Gianotto is fighting the charges against him, and his attorney, David Brook, said the next hearing is scheduled for April 10. That will be the third day of testimony heard on allegations that Gianotto failed to safeguard and account for plans for construction projects, repeatedly being absent from the performance of his duties, and several other charges. "I think that at least from my own point of view, the second day of the hearing demonstrated that the borough has no legitimate basis for seeking to terminate Mr. Gianotto," Brook said. The attorney said the borough lacks proper documentation and appropriate reasoning for terminating his client. "The borough has all of these policies, like progressive discipline, like performance assessments or evaluations," Brook said. "They never did any of these things and they openly admit that they don't do it for anybody." Brook said he filed legal papers against Borough Business Administrator Jeffry Bertrand personally for what he called "outrageous behavior." He noted that Bertrand has another attorney representing him in that matter. "We are seeking to get reimbursed," Brook said of Gianotto's legal expenses. "Residents end up paying for all these excessive cost for an issue that never should have gotten to where it is," Brook added. Bertrand could not be reached for comment yesterday. Though the construction office has now issued permits for the project, Macagnone said the anticipated completion of phase one may change. This adjustment will not postpone the completion of the project, however, he said. The board will know more about the anticipated completion date for phase one by its April 10 meeting, Macagnone said. Schnitzer will let the board know of the additional cost associated with the firewalls. "He did the design [specifications] and handed it over to the contractor," Macagnone said. "We are waiting for the bids, which we are expecting for all three phases, so we can see the whole scope and breadth of the additional cost." "I am very confident that it is not going to jeopardize the project," Macagnone said.