Building owner testifies in Kiddie Kollege case

The owner of a contaminated Gloucester County building that was turned into a day-care center took the stand yesterday to explain how he let as many as 100 children breathe toxic mercury vapors.

For the first time, Jim Sullivan Jr., a local mobile-home dealer, offered a public accounting of how the Kiddie Kollege Day Care was able to open in a former thermometer factory in Franklin Township in 2004.

Sullivan testified in Superior Court in a trial to determine whether his responsibility for the toxic property can be voided because of governmental negligence in warning him of the contamination and because of a paperwork discrepancy.

If Judge James Rafferty rules in his favor, Sullivan and family members involved in acquiring the building could be excused from various class-action lawsuits filed by the children's parents. The Sullivans also would not be liable for roughly $1 million to pay for environmental studies and demolition of the building, as ordered by the state.

Kiddie Kollege was closed on July 28, 2006, after a state environmental inspector noticed that the once-padlocked building had reopened as a children's day-care center. The former Accutherm factory contained mercury vapors at least 27 times acceptable limits, and mercury beads clung to ceiling joists and floorboards.

Parents say some of the children have suffered seizures, agitation and peeling skin, but it is unclear whether the conditions are caused by mercury poisoning. Mercury vapors can cause neurological and kidney problems.

Sullivan and his son, Jim Sullivan III, a licensed real estate broker, testified in the one-day trial that they acquired the building at a tax sale and leased it to the day-care operator. They said they had assumed the contamination was minimal, based on a two-page "Mini Pollution Report" prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Sullivan said he only read the report's conclusion, which he interpreted as saying the building was not a health or environmental hazard.

"I did not read the first page or the first part of the second page," he said.

The full report identified two areas of the structure where mercury vapors were found in excess of standards, and described mercury droplets that were emitting vapors. It also mentioned that 500 to 1,000 thermometers and a 55-gallon drum with unknown contents had been left behind.

Sullivan said that had he "read, or understood," this, "I absolutely would not have touched the property."

He said that he financed the acquisition and that his son was in "charge of the whole thing," buying the building for $37,000 in tax-sale certificates, handling the foreclosure, renovating the building, and managing it.

"My son came to me one day and said there was a property across the street from his real estate office that was going up for tax sale," Sullivan said. The only thing that the elder Sullivan said he knew about the building was that it had been "abandoned a long time" and was "an eyesore."

Sullivan said that his son asked the township and state for information about the property and that each gave him the EPA report.

"I may have glanced at it, but what Jimmy pointed out to me was those last few things," Sullivan said, referring to the report's conclusion.

Its last sentence reads: "Based on air monitoring, soil sampling and wipe sample analysis and the condition and security of the building and surrounding property, the site does not present an immediate threat to human health or the environment."

Based on that assessment, Sullivan said, he approved the purchase.

State environmental officials have said that the report was intended to be read in its entirety. It was written, they say, to indicate that no one was at risk pending a clean-up as long as the building remained closed.

Jim Sullivan III testified that he had read the whole report but arrived at the same conclusion his father did.

"I was pleased because I didn't think there was anything wrong with the building," he said. Now, he said, he realizes that he "interpreted wrong."

Before purchasing the building, Jim Sullivan III said, he wrote to the state Department of Environmental Protection asking if it had other information about the property. "I wanted to make sure there was nothing else, because the EPA report didn't seem to be a bad report," he said.

The letter, addressed "To Whom It May Concern," was never answered, he said. That, too, led him to assume there was no problem with the building, he said.

State officials have said they never received the letter. They also say that they gave Jim Sullivan III more than the mini-report.

The Sullivans have sued Franklin Township and the DEP, saying the family was never directly informed of the contamination.

Their attorney, Glenn Harris, argued yesterday that their deed should be voided because of bureaucratic negligence and because the tax sale certificates and foreclosure papers bear the wrong name, Navillus L.L.C. instead of Navillus Group General Partnership.

Jim Sullivan Jr. set up the partnership for his four children so they could purchase the building. The partnership later sold the building to Sullivan's company, Jim Sullivan Inc., for $1.

Under cross-examination, Jim Sullivan III acknowledged that when he researched the building, he did not check the DEP's Known Contaminated Sites List, which at the time listed about 17,000 toxic places in New Jersey in need of remediation.

"I went to the town and the DEP, and I believed that superseded any lists that are usually outdated," said Sullivan, who was aware of the agency's list.

James Maley Jr., who represents Franklin Township, said the Accutherm factory was on the list when the Sullivans considered their purchase. He hammered at Jim Sullivan III, who is also a licensed appraiser, for failing to see other "red flags."

"Did it ever raise a red flag to you that the bank that held the mortgage didn't foreclose on it?" he asked. Not even the bank wanted the toxic site, Maley said.

"I just assumed they didn't want the property because the mortgage was minuscule" and not worth reselling, Sullivan replied.

Before the Sullivans bought the building, a bank representative told town officials and the factory owner that a sign reading "Danger: Inhalation Hazard" should be posted, the bank said. Whether the sign was hung at that time is unclear.

Maley also asked why Sullivan did not become concerned about a newspaper legal notice that said properties in the tax sale could be contaminated.

"It was one of multiple disclaimers I read," Sullivan replied, saying he intended to check the property by asking town and state officials.

Rafferty said he would take the case under advisement and issue a ruling after reading final written arguments. The lawyers said the ruling could come in about a month.

None of the class-action lawsuits involving the children and staff at Kiddie Kollege Day Care has been scheduled for trial.