Lighthouse ‘Friends’ Testify

COURT HOUSE ─ Those who have tended the Hereford Inlet Lighthouse, built in 1874, likely never imagined it a setting in controversy’s diadem. Since November 2017, the Friends of the Lighthouse have disputed with North Wildwood city officials regarding their “locked-out” status. Court proceedings, beginning in January 2018, continue to peel back layers of questions and misconceptions. 
The truth of North Wildwood’s lease status remains: the city holds the lease of Hereford Inlet Lighthouse from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).
According to official documentation, the city is the “tenant,” and the state holds “landlord” status.
Both parties met March 19 before Superior Court Judge John Porto and commenced with testimonies from various individuals.
Friends’ attorney Christopher Gillin-Schwartz called Steven Murray, Friends’ former chairman, to the stand.
Murray began with explaining his role as superintendent of grounds in 1986. According to Murray, he created the present grounds over a three-year period.
In 1995, Murray joined the Lighthouse Commission, a board dedicated to the care and preservation of the lighthouse, under late mayor Anthony Catanoso.
Murray described the commission as “self-sustaining,” keeping taxpayer dollars “out” and also rejecting politics.
When the commission disbanded under Mayor William Henfey, Henfey then appointed the Friends to care for Hereford Inlet Lighthouse.
According to Murray, Henfey “intended for the city to get out of the picture.” However, as documents entered in evidence show, the city could never legally sub-lease the lighthouse to another entity.
The Friends, a non-profit organization, signed the management agreement with North Wildwood in 2011. Though in existence for some years prior, the Friends had no managerial responsibilities during the commission’s tenure.
When asked if he understood the nature of the agreement, Murray admitted he “never had to look at it,” and said no attorneys were present. Schwartz reminded the court that tenants are allowed the legal process of removal.
During cross-examination, City Solicitor William Kaufmann asked if Friends’ lawyer Alan Gould did not explain the agreement.
Murray answered that Gould had “looked them (agreement) over.”
Kaufmann then directed Murray’s attention to Gould’s signature at the bottom of the agreement. Gould had reviewed and approved the agreement.
Kaufmann presented to Porto that both parties “had opportunity to review the agreement” with “full and complete understanding.”
Porto said there is “no further need to involve Mr. Gould.”
Murray then explained the Friends’ function regarding the lighthouse’s care. Transforming the site into a historically accurate museum, Murray said the lighthouse was a “catch-all of North Wildwood relics.”
Caring for the grounds, creating advertisements, preservation efforts, and promoting education and culture composed the bulk of the Friends’ duties under the city.
“What are the obligations you (Friends) overtook?” Schwartz said.
Murray replied the Friends began “where the commission left off,” creating a “seamless transition.”
Schwartz then asked if the Friends expected to finish their “term” as caretakers. Murray said yes.
Schwartz expounded upon the Friends “going above and beyond” the scope of the agreement, carrying out city responsibilities.
Kaufmann countered, reading paragraphs from the lease between the city with DEP and the Friends. Kaufmann stated the Friends have “no authority” and cannot enter any sub-lease agreement.
Therefore, as stipulated in the agreement, the Friends agreed to managerial responsibilities. The DEP cannot lease the lighthouse directly to them.
Murray said the “spirit was the same” and reiterated Henfey’s intentions. Murray said the Friends’ relationship with the city was based on trust.
Murray later admitted the Friends were made aware of the termination in September 2017, two months before the lockout.
According to Kaufmann, City Clerk Scott Jett presented Murray a copy of the resolution terminating the agreement, an action within the city’s legal rights.
“We (Friends) were preparing for it (termination),” Murray said.
A letter written to a neighbor of the lighthouse also fueled the cross-examination.
According to Kaufmann, the Friends had no right to threaten legal action against property owners.
“It was kind of a bluff and a warning,” Murray responded. A pine tree had been cut down, landing on lighthouse property.
Murray claimed the neighbor’s son cut down the tree in the middle of the night. Murray did not further pursue the matter.
However, after a second occurrence, Murray testified he wrote the letter. Murray said he did not notify city officials due to a lack of action taken against a neighbor of Mayor Patrick Rosenello.
According to Murray, the neighbor sprayed pesticides and affected lighthouse property.
In following questions, Kaufmann said gasoline and paint were stored in the lighthouse basement, a fire code violation.
Murray replied he was not aware of any fire inspection, but did see the fire marshal’s vehicle outside the lighthouse after the Nov. 28 lockout.
Murray also maintained the acquisitions of artifacts, claiming friends donated objects for display and use in the lighthouse. He also testified he believed the Friends were “sole stewards of the lighthouse.”
When questioned regarding statements made to news media, Murray stated he did not say he would “remove” artifacts.
“You had no idea if they (donors) wanted their items removed,” Kaufmann said.
Murray asserted the Friends’ right to damages and that the city violated the agreement.
After an hour recess, Porto announced further testimonies would be heard April 23 or 24, depending on witnesses’ schedules.
To contact Rachel Rogish, email rrogish@cmcherald.com.