Misrepresentations on plan for Sandy Hook

The media has distorted what Jim Wassel plans to do at Fort Hancock on Sandy Hook. At least that’s what Wassel said — if we heard him correctly.

Of course, hearing Wassel correctly may not be as easy as it might seem. Wassel, apparently, has no problems with reports of his project when they appear, but if the plans are later criticized, he is among that special group of people who is certain there has been an error, and it is on the part of the listener.

By that standard, there have clearly been many misrepresentations of Wassel’s plan.

Consider what he has said his project will cost. Wassel has said his proposal to rehabilitate and adapt some of the buildings at the fort will require $90 million, $65 million or, most recently, somewhere in the middle of that range at $75 million. It is worth noting that $72 million and $80 million are also figures he has used. It is also possible, though it seems unlikely, that Wassel has said he could not put a figure on the cost of the project.

Whatever that cost may ultimately be, there is no doubt that the media has gotten the number wrong.

But whose fault is that if he keeps changing his price tag?

Wassel’s "vision" for the site also has been incorrectly reported, as long as you take whatever his most recent version of the plan is as the one that he intends to build.

That "vision" originally was a "technology-driven office space and a state-of-the-art educational facility and conference center." That is what it says in his original proposal to lease the buildings of the fort. (That proposal, by the way, is what the National Park Service (NPS) based its original selection of Wassel Realty Group as the redevelopment "partner" for the fort on.)

Or, perhaps, at the heart of Wassel’s plan for redeveloping the fort is the restoration of the dilapidated officers club and the creation of a bar/restaurant in the building known as the mule barn as well as bed-and-breakfasts, aspects of the proposal he touted during a tour for the media he and the NPS conducted earlier this year.

Those statements were indeed widely reported.

That might not be correct, though, because it also has been reported that Wassel’s vision for the site is an educational/science facility with Rutgers University and Brookdale Community College as major tenants.

That may well be the plan, and in at least one media outlet he is quoted this week as saying his vision for the project "has shifted."

It remains to be seen if the report of those remarks are viewed by Wassel as accurate.

He did not mention if the shift that has taken place includes the state-of-the-art health and fitness facility. That was once reported as part of the plan but may not be included as Wassel has not mentioned it lately.

Looking back at various media reports, it is almost certain that Wassel is right. His plan has been misrepresented in the media.

But that shouldn’t shock anyone — least of all Wassel. Until he settles on just what his plan is, the media will probably keep reporting what he says it is.