Marlboro settles litigation

BY REBECCA MORTON Staff Writer

MARLBORO – Four legal cases involvingMarlboro have been settled or dismissed in recent months while several litigations have been put on hold, according to Mayor Jonathan Hornik.

The cases that were settled or dismissed were:

• Concerned Residents of Marlboro vs. Marlboro Planning Board.

• Concerned Residents of Marlboro vs. Marlboro Mayor and Township Council.

• Monmouth County vs. Estate of Eugene Fairello

• Schecter vs. Corcione.

As a result, Hornik said the township will see a reduction in legal expenses of about 20 percent in the upcoming municipal budget. That works out to a savings of about $100,000, he said.

Upon taking office in January, Hornik said the administration would review all outstanding litigation to determine what it involved and what it was costing Marlboro.

“I believe that for too long the township’s litigation strategy was more driven by politics to present prior administrators in a good light,” said Hornik, who is an attorney.

He said when township officials choose to institute litigation they must do so wisely.

The mayor also said Marlboro’s legal professionals have agreed to lower fees and provide caps for legal services.

“We have successfully resolved employment litigation lawsuits that were filed against prior administrations and we are currently negotiating settlements with several active litigants in land use and municipal law matters,” Hornik said.

Stays have been negotiated on several internal lawsuits pending an audit of the Marlboro Police Department.

In 2007 then-Mayor Robert Kleinberg unveiled a municipal lawsuit against “corrupt officials.” Attorney Stephen Dratch was retained to recoup ill-gotten gains of former Marlboro public officials. Dratch was retained on a contingency basis.

When asked about the status of that civil action, Hornik said Dratch briefed him and the Township Council on the case. Hornik said municipal officials encouraged Dratch to do what he could in the matter, but said he made it clear there would be no reimbursements paid to the attorney from Marlboro’s taxpayers.