By gloria stravelli
Staff Writer
The National Park Service has assigned a special agent to look into allegations that there were irregularities in the procurement process the agency used to choose a redeveloper for buildings at Fort Hancock.
William G. Hooper Jr., special agent stationed at Cape Cod National Seashore, confirmed this week that he will "review some administrative activities at the Hook" but said he wasn’t free to divulge more information because his inquiry is ongoing.
Hooper said it is not unusual for the agency "to assign personnel from other areas to work with other parks on reviewing procedures."
According to Pam Boteler, director of external affairs for the Office of the Inspector General in the Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C., that office kicked back to the National Park Service (NPS) complaints about the process followed by the agency in selecting a proposal by Sandy Hook Partners, LLC to rehabilitate and lease historic buildings at Fort Hancock.
"We did look into this matter based on some complaints we received," she said. "We did a preliminary inquiry and determined it would be best looked at by the National Park Service since it was under their jurisdiction, so we referred it to the park service and they have assigned a special agent to the case."
Hooper will report to the NPS Northeast regional director, Marie Rust, according to David Barna, chief of public affairs at park service headquarters in Washington.
Sandy Hook Deputy Superintendent Richard Wells said Tuesday that the administrative review is looking into complaints made by Peter O’Such of Fair Haven.
The review is standard procedure for the park service, which has special agents scattered at parks throughout the country, including Sandy Hook, he said.
"It’s part of the due diligence of the park service," he added.
O’Such, who spent more than 29 years in government service as a procurement specialist, has been calling for a review of the NPS handling of the procurement procedure since June 2002, charging that the park service mishandled the process that led to the agency signing a letter of intent for a 60-year historic lease with the developer.
Dissatisfied with the response of local park service officials, he detailed his concerns in a letter to the Office of the Inspector General in June 2002.
When no response came from the Office of the Inspector General, O’Such said, he called the agency and was told that there was no record of his letter and was told to send a copy to the Department of the Interior’s New York office.
Two months later, he said, he had not heard from either office, so he called the New York office and was told there had been a finding that the park service had complied with regulations in the procurement process.
He said that in December, he sent a certified letter to the General Accounting Office’s Fraud Net, asking for a review of the procedures followed by the NPS in awarding the lease.
According to O’Such, the government failed to follow procurement regulations that "level the playing field" and therefore the process wasn’t legal. His objections include the fact that those who submitted proposals weren’t told preference would be given to proposals that involved a greater number of buildings and that historic tax credits were only available on lease terms of 40 years or more.
In addition, he said that while Wassel Realty Group submitted the proposal, a letter of intent was signed with a separate entity, Sandy Hook Partners, both headed by James Wassel of Rumson. Wassel Realty also filed its proposal two days after the deadline, he said.
When he did not receive a reply, O’Such said he persisted and renewed calls to the agency and was contacted last week by John Dedona, assistant inspector general at the DOI, who told him a special agent had been assigned to review the matter.
"People doing buying of goods and services for the government don’t make it difficult for fun," O’Such said this week. "They do it because it’s the law, and when somebody doesn’t follow the regulations, I believe they are in violation of the law."
According to Wells, a review of park service procedures has already found that the process followed was legal.
"The Office of the Inspector General did an investigation and determined that what the National Park Service is doing conforms with federal regulations and that their office plans no further action," Wells said Tuesday.
Wells said the review will not hold up the process the agency is following toward finalizing the lease agreement with Sandy Hook Partners, including preparing its response to public comment received on the proposal. That process has been under way since last year.
Judith Stanley Coleman, the most prominent opponent of the park service’s proposal to enter into a 60-year historic lease with private developer Sandy Hook Partners LLC, Tuesday called the review "a lip service investigation."
Chair of the Monmouth Conservation Foundation, she is also head of Save Sandy Hook, a grassroots organization that is opposed to commercial development on Sandy Hook.
Retired Superior Court Judge James Coleman, her husband, added, "We appreciate any investigation into the procedures because we think they are flawed, but they [the park service] shouldn’t investigate themselves. "