Monday, November 12, 2012

Carcinogens at Frank’s: Should We Ignore?

Resident Hal Samis, having recently retired from the real estate industry, posed these questions to the Town Board and several news media outlets. The Greenburgh Town Board seems to rarely, if ever, answer questions that residents raise at the Town board meetings. ABG felt obliged to publish these as Mr. Samis’ GameOn 365 questions are germane to the public’s right to know. The lamestream media will ignore them to insulate The Paul. Here are Mr. Samis’ unedited questions:

Could these questions be answered? And such preventive action/notice, as would be required or deemed prudent, be undertaken IMMEDIATELY?

1) When does the Lease become effective? I am not asking when rent commences but at what point or date certain that the Tenant (GameOn 365) takes possession of the property and assumes standard Tenant responsibility?

2) Whatever entity controls the property, be it the Town or the Tenant, now that it has been determined that the site is contaminated, i.e. evidence of carcinogens, shouldn't the Landlord and/or Tenant, the responsible party(ies), immediately see to it that the property is properly sealed off from allowing unrestricted entrance and that signs warning of contamination be posted immediately. In its present unsecured state, visitation to the property is both possible and permitted with little effort and assuredly without reliance upon hazmat outerwear.

3) Given that there is no Bonding or even Rent Security required of the Tenant (normally found in all Leases), at the time that the Tenant accepts the Certificate of Occupancy and opens its doors to the Public:

a) over the course of the Tenant's rent paying 15 year term, should discovery find the site to be still contaminated and this to the harm of the visiting and unknowing public (had a less than comprehensive plan of remediation been chosen), who is responsible for such damages as may result from successful litigation by harmed plaintiffs?

b) were the Tenant, GameOn 365 and its successors or assigns, to be found liable by a Court, what assets, other than the existing site improvements net of liens, does the Tenant possess to satisfy such judgements? Since the Town presumably conducted due diligence into the finances of the Tenant and found them to be ready, willing and ABLE to enter into this Lease, I would assume that by unannounced side agreement (albeit contrary to the Lease "this constitutes the entire...") that some sort of escrow arrangement of future profits is required. Am I correct regarding the existence of such?

c) if both the Town and the Tenant, jointly are found liable and, should the Tenant be found lacking in assets, will the Town then be solely responsible for the payment of damages?

d) were the Town and the Tenant, singly or jointly, give consent to a sports facility which will recruit children as paying clientele AND to do so without first seeking all cures and remedies currently available to the Town and the Tenant to cure known contamination, are both the Town Board and the Tenant subject to criminal prosecution?

Please prepare specific answers to the specific questions ready for delivery at the next Town Board meeting. This should require little effort as I'm certain that the Town Board would already know these answers having voted to execute the Lease, having voted to expand the Phase II Study and having accepted the language of the Referendum Proposition.

Hal Samis

No comments:

Post a Comment