SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

CHANCERY DIVISION - GENERAL EQUITY PART

UNION COUNTY
DOCKET NO.: UNN-C-107-14
APP. DIV. NO.:

IN THE MATTER OF THE

APPLICATION OF MUHLENBERG
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, A TRANSCRIPT
NEW JERSEY NON-PROFIT OF
CORPORATION AND THE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
MUHLENBERG FOUNDATION, A
NEW JERSEY NON-PROFIT
CORPORATION.

Place: Union County Superior Court

Courthouse Annex
Elizabeth, NJ 07207
Date: January 23, 2015
BEFORE:

THE HONORABLE KATHERINE R. DUPUIS, P.J.S.C.

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED BY:

NANCY A. PIWOWAR (1129 Myrtle Avenue, Plainfield,

New Jersey 07063)

APPEARANCES:

FRANK R. CIESLA, ESQ. -AND- ARI G. BURD, ESQ.

(Giordano Halleran & Ciesla)
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs, Muhlenberg Regional
Medical Center, and the Muhlenberg Foundation

JAY A. GANZMAN, ESQ.

(Office of the Attorney General)
Attorney for the State

NANCY PIWOWAR, PRO SE

DEBORAH DOWE, PRO SE

Rebecca Y. Natal, AD/T 557

UTOMATED TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES

A P.O. Box 1582

Laurel Springs, New Jersey
(856) 784-4276
(856) 784-7254 (fax)
autotranscripts(a),comcast.net
 1 I N D E X
2
3 (1/23/15)
4 ARGUMENT PAGE(S)
5
6 BY: Mr. Ciesla 5, 21, 25, 27, 28
7 BY: Mr. Ganzman 9, 24
8 BY: Ms. Dowe 9, 32
9 BY Ms. Piwowar 17, 30
10 BY Mr. Burd 27
11
12 THE COURT - Decision 14, 33
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

1 COURT OFFICER: Remain seated. Court is in

2 session.
3 THE COURT: I had gotten letters from a
4 number of people wanting to comment on this. Are they
5 in the Courtroom?
6 MR. GANZMAN: Yes, Your Honor.
7 THE COURT: Okay. They — they should be
8 able to come up, too. Steve, do you want to set them
9 up?
10 COURT OFFICER: How many folks do we have?
11 How many people do we have?
12 THE COURT: A Ms. Dowe, a Ms. Prowick [sic].
13 MS. PIWOWAR: Piwowar.
14 THE COURT: Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't even
15 get close on that one.
16 MS. PIWOWAR: That's okay.
17 THE COURT: And there was a third one. Let
18 me.
19 MR. BURD: I think the third one was a joint.
20 THE COURT: Was a joint.
21 MR. GANZMAN: For both.
22 THE COURT: Okay. All right. That's the
23 same one
24 Good morning.
25 MS. PIWOWAR: Good morning, Judge.
 1 THE COURT: All right. I'm going to ask you
2 for your appearances, which is simply your names. May
3 I have your names, please, counsel?
4 MR. CIESLA: Frank Ciesla of Giordano
5 Halleran & Ciesla, for Muhlenberg Regional Medical
6 Center, and for Muhlenberg Foundation.
7 MR. BURD: Ari Burd, also with the Giordano
8 firm.
9 THE COURT: And your name, ma'am?
10 MS. PIWOWAR: Nancy Piwowar, P-I-W-O-W-A-R,
11 pro se.
12 MS. DOWE: I'm Deborah Dowe, for the
13 Muhlenberg independence, pro se.
14 MR. GANZMAN: Deputy Attorney General, Jay
15 Ganzman, for the State.
16 THE COURT: I will do my best, but
17 pronunciation is not my strong point. So, if we could
18
19 All right. I have an application here to
20 take certain funds that belong to Muhlenberg Hospital
21 and the Foundation and apply them for other uses
22 because Muhlenberg and the Foundation no longer exists
23 as it presently did.
24 I -- and by way of background, I am certainly
25 aware of the fact that the hospital closed, causing

1 great consternation in the community, which I very much

2 understand. I had a child born there. I used it as
3 the hospital myself all the time. But, that being
4 said, the hospital is, in fact, closed, and there's
5 really nothing I can do about that.
6 ' So what I'm addressing today is what do I do
7 with those funds that can probably no longer be used
8 for the use they were intended? The law gives me to
9 the ability to, at that point in time, say, okay. Let
10 me change this — if all the funds were -- I — for the
11 -- for a purpose that no longer existed. All the funds
12 were to send Mr. Hoffman's children to college and as
13 it turned out, they all went to college. Well, what am
14 I going to do with that money? I've got to do
15 something with the money.
16 " So, the application now is well, what do I do
17 with that extra money? Why don't I hear from the
18 plaintiff first?
19 " MR. CIESLA: All right. As Your Honor
20 stated, Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center was closed
21 in 2008, with the approval of the Department of Health
22 and upheld — and -- and that approval was upheld by
23 the Appellate Division.
24 At this point in time, well, the Foundation,
25 which still exists, a not-for-profit foundation,
 1 Muhlenberg Foundation, and the Muhlenberg Regional
2 Medical Center, which is still a not-for-profit entity,
3 even though it is no longer operating an acute care
4 hospital, were holding funds for both purposes at
5 Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center when it was an acute
6 care hospital and for the School of Nursing.
7 Let me just get to the School of Nursing
8 first because that's a pretty simple application. The
9 School of Nursing has continued. It's continued in the
10 same location. It's continued with the same policies.
11 It's continued the operation as it was before
12 Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center Hospital was closed.
13 It's continuing that way through today. However, the
14 law requires that that be sponsored by and operated by
15 an entity that has an acute care license.
16 So what is happening is the School of Nursing
17 is operating consistent with the State statute under
18 the J.F.K. acute care license. We do not intend to
19 repurpose any of those funds, other than to continue
20 providing them as they were intended, for the School of
21 Nursing and the activities of the School of Nursing.
22 All we're asking the Court to do is approve the
23 operation of that by J.F.K., pursuant to its acute care
24 license as required by law. So, that's one category.
25 Second category are funds which were held by

1 Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center, the not-for-profit,

2 or held by the Muhlenberg Foundation, the not-for-
3 profit, for specific hospital purposes. Those purposes
4 have been frustrated.
5 What we're intending -- what we're asking the
6 Court to do is to approve those funds that have been
7 frustrated now to be repurposed for the renovation and
8 relocation of a satellite emergency room on the
9 Muhlenberg campus for a laboratory — outpatient
10 laboratory on the Muhlenberg campus, for a radiology —
11 outpatient radiology operation, on the Muhlenberg
12 campus, and for the stationing of an M.I.C.U., Mobile
13 Intensive Care Unit, as well as a basic life support
14 ambulances on the Muhlenberg campus. All of this is to
15 continue to serve the healthcare needs of the
16 population that was previously served by Muhlenberg
17 Regional Medical Center.
18 " They're outpatient services, but they're on
19 the same campus for the same population. So that's
20 what we're asking that the funds that are currently
21 subject to Court approval, be repurposed where they've
22 been designated for — prior — previously for use by
23 the Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center when it operated
24 an acute care hospital. That's simply what's before
25 the Court.
 8

1 There were funds that we're also asking the

2 Court to approve, the approval of the Attorney General,
3 that were under the statute that were less than
4 $250,000 or/and — and over 20 years old. The Attorney
5 General has already approved repurposing all of those
6 funds for this project. And when I say this project,
7 the project, of course, is the relocation and
8 renovation on the Muhlenberg campus for the activities
9 that we just went through.
10 So, that's what we're asking the Court. We
11 believe that's very consistent with the purposes. The
12 purposes were to provide healthcare, and Muhlenberg
13 Regional Medical Center, which fell under the acute
14 care hospital which no longer exists, we're going to be
15 providing those on the same campus for the same
16 population. So, we're going to be providing those
17 healthcare services that's very close to what the
18 purposes that were frustrated were originally for.
19 " THE COURT: Thank you. I think it makes
20 sense to hear from Mr. Hoffman [sic] next.
21 MR. GANZMAN: I'm sorry. Mr. Hoffman [sic]
22
23 THE COURT: Oh. Hoffman [sic] — Hoffman's
24 your boss. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.
25 MR. GANZMAN: Yes. I'm Mr. Ganzman.

1 THE COURT: I hope Mr. Hoffman's college --

2 college tuition is paying for his children, also.
3 MR. GANZMAN: I really don't have much to add
4 to what plaintiff said. We've actually been reviewing
5 these funds that were being held by Muhlenberg Regional
6 Medical Center and Muhlenberg Foundation with counsel
7 for probably about four years, and they've organized
8 these funds into various categories, and each of those
9 categories is acceptable to us. We have no opposition
10 to their application. As far as we're concerned, the
11 monies are going to be continued to be used in the
12 community for purposes as near as possible as what the
13 donors intended originally, and we really have no
14 objection to any part of the application.
15 ' THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Dowe, what would you
16 like to say?
17 MS. DOWE: My concern is that I believe that
18 the (inaudible) proceeding should have been held in
19 '91, when they announced a merger involving Muhlenberg
20 Hospital and we searched in vain for merger
21 documentation and didn't find it, but after the
22 announcement of the merger, the newspapers constantly
23 told everybody that J.F.K. Solaris owned Muhlenberg and
24 owned the Muhlenberg land. I think that is a
25 fraudulent misrepresentation. If they had done a
 10

1 (inaudible) proceeding in '97 at the time of the so-

2 called merger or at '08, when the hospital was -- was
3 closed, I think it would have given Trinitas and other
4 entities like the Neighborhood Health Center the option
5 of competing for those funds.
6 One of our biggest concerns are for the 900
7 -- do you mind if I sit? I have health issues.
8 THE COURT: No, no. Go ahead.
9 MS. DOWE: Okay. One of our biggest concerns
10 are for the 900 births from Plainfield that are on the
11 far west end of the town.
12 THE COURT: Uh-huh.
13 MS. DOWE: And these women were directed to
14 give birth in Trinitas. This has resulted in some
15 babies born in ambulances, baby born in all kinds of
16 situations.
17 THE COURT: Is this still ongoing or are they
18 going to J.F.K.?
19 MS. DOWE: No. J.F.K. declined to accept the
20 births from Plainfield.
21 THE COURT: Oh, okay.
22 MS. DOWE: They only took the profitable
23 ventures
24 THE COURT Uh-huh.
25 MS. DOWE: What they neglected to take is

11

1 very strategic. They did not take our births and

2 diverted them to the furthest hospital away. There are
3 several other hospitals closer -- closer, like --
4 Overlook is closer and even Somerset Medical Center is
5 closer. But most of the closer hospitals are in
6 predominantly white communities, so they directed the
7 minority women from Plainfield to go almost to Newark
8 to give birth at Trinitas.
9 THE COURT: Trinitas is across the street.
10 It's not almost in Newark.
11 MS. DOWE: From -- from Plainfield, that's
12 what it seems like, when you're talking about if there
13 is no high speed --
14 THE COURT: I still live in Plainfield. I
15 understand it takes a long time to get from one -- it
16 takes you 40 minutes to get from one to the other.
17 MS. DOWE: There's no -- there's no way that
18 you can gun it —
19 THE COURT; Maybe an ambulance faster, but it
20 does take a while.
21 MS. DOWE: -- up the road. There is no way
22 -- you should hear the nightmare stories of trying to
23 get a woman who's already had two or three babies to
24 Trinitas after she's gone into labor.
25 My whole thing is, if, at the time —
 12

1 THE COURT: I can't understand — I'm a

2 little confused about one fact you're telling me.
3 Who's directing them? What are they -- they --
4 MS. DOWE: This decision --
5 THE COURT: — if they show up at the
6 doorstep at Overlook, doesn't Overlook take them? I
7 mean, isn't the ambulance taking them?
8 MS. DOWE: Okay. Would you like to go give
9 birth someplace where -- wait -- let me finish. Let me
10
11 THE COURT: I -- I just don't understand your
12 facts. I just don't
13 MS. DOWE: I'm going to explain this to you.
14 THE COURT: Okay.
15 MS. DOWE: Okay? When you go to give birth,
16 they usually know your blood type, they usually have
17 your chart, and you usually have your care provider at
18 that facility.
19 THE COURT: Okay. All right.
20 MS. DOWE: You can actually go any place in
21 the world and give birth if you don't care about
22 walking in off the street and having somebody who
23 doesn't know you from Adam.
24 THE COURT: So your point is the records have
25 been -- have been forwarded to Trinitas.

13

1 MS . DOWE : Their records, their midwives --

2 THE COURT: Okay. Got it.
3 MS . DOWE : -- and they talk about the nursing
4 schools need to have an acute care facility, but they
5 don't talk about the federally qualified health center
6 in Plainfield that they, you know, said was going to
7 take over much of the care, needs to have an acute care
8 hospital and a relationship for these people to go give
9 birth. So —
10 THE COURT: Neighbor --
11 MS . DOWE : The Neighborhood Community Health
12 Center is a --
13 THE COURT: The -- that's not a hospital
14 facility.
15 MS . DOWE : -- it is the place where the women
16 have their pre-natal care --
17 THE COURT: Okay. All right.
18 MS . DOWE : -- and this facility is linked to
19 Trinitas. Trinitas is the only hospital that would
20 agree to have a staff relationship with the Health
21 Center and to accept their births formally. And I
22 believe, since some of this money was left specifically
23 for maternity care, including a building a woman built
24 on the land that still stands --
25 THE COURT: Which of the monies would you --
 14

1 MS. DOWE: The Claussen —

2 MS. PIWOWAR: Claussen —
3 MS. DOWE: -- was left for maternity care.
4 MS. PIWOWAR: It's not even in this list.
5 MS. DOWE: It's not even listed here. There
6
7 THE COURT: Oh, so I'm not working with that
8 one. Okay.
9 MS. DOWE: Well, do you -- oh, oh, so you're
10 going to make sure that nothing that isn't listed is
11 impacted by your decision. Right?
12 THE COURT: Only what — only — only what's
13 here is what I'm dealing with.
14 MS. DOWE: Okay. So — so I'm glad that's on
15 the record, that only the funds listed, because we have
16 a list of other substantial funds that were not
17 included --
18 THE COURT: All right.
19 MS. DOWE: And we were concerned that they
20 not be impacted why -- by somehow, you know, leaving
21 them out. Okay.
22 THE COURT: I -- I imagine if they're going
23 to do something, I'll hear about it later.
24 MS. DOWE: Trinitas also has a nursing
25 school. Okay? Under the care of these people, the

15

1 nursing school has had to put up a bond with the

2 Federal government in order to continue to receive
3 financial aid. This bond was necessitated by their
4 poor financial health. So when your poor financial
5 health is so extreme, the government will not let you
6 do student loans without a securing bond. That is an
7 indicator that they have undermined the financial
8 stability of this individual during their -- of -- of
9 this institution during their control.
10 The nursing school had a block plus
11 commercial real estate that paid rent to it that they
12 sold, and they sold a lot of other things that funded
13 the nursing school. Now the nursing school is broke
14 and we're supposed to take money that was left for
15 other things and pour it into the nursing school, when
16 they undermined the financial basis of the nursing
17 school that existed before they took over.
18 I've submitted documentation on all of this.
19 THE COURT: Okay. Okay. I — I just — I
20 have a number of funds I have to do something with.
21 Your argument right now seems to be addressed to the
22 money that was to go to the nursing home.
23 " M S . DOWE: No. It's addressed to the fact
24 that there was a strategic delay of addressing this to
25 -- to make sure that they could exhaust as many of
 16

1 these resources as possible without competition and now

2 they're coming to Court to pick up the stray pieces
3 left on the ground.
4 They have sold houses that we believe do not
5 have clear title. They have put a mortgage of $153
6 million on the land, rolling over debt of theirs that
7 goes back to the eighties.
8 THE COURT: Who's they, their?
9 MS. DOWE: Solaris, J.F.K. And I'd like to
10 know why their name isn't on this action, since I have
11 documents that say that they own and control the
12 Muhlenberg assets. So, where is their name?
13 We were told to reply to them or to ask them
14 for documents, but nowhere on this action are they
15 represented. They are the people who have been put --
16 telling everybody in the newspaper that they own
17 Muhlenberg for years.
18 I believe that this is intentional subterfuge
19 and I believe that -- that we need an investigation of
20 -- instead of a -- a sanitizing of -- of what has taken
21 place with these assets since '97.
22 THE COURT: Thank you. I'm -- I'm sorry.
23 I'm having trouble with you --
24 MS. PIWOWAR: Ms. Piwowar.
25 THE COURT: Pilovar [sic]?

17

1 MS. PIWOWAR: Yes. Piwowar. W's like Vs.

2 I'm here because I can speak specifically to at least
3 four of the funds that are listed --
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 MS. PIWOWAR: —• that you need to deal with.
6 THE COURT: All right.
7 MS. PIWOWAR: Okay. The Josephine Lapsley
8 Fund. She had a Will and it's specific in her Will
9 about the scholarships goes to people, adjacent
10 students, adjacent to — to the City of Plainfield, and
11 the — when they last issued them, they gave them to
12 people from Westfield and Bridgewater, among other
13 people, and they admitted in a meeting to me that I had
14 with the City and representatives of J.F.K., that
15 they're going to have to go back to the Board of
16 Governors to ask why they did that.
17 But her Will was modified in — by the Court
18 back in July, according to the documents I have
19 received from Mr. Burd, but nobody addresses the fact
20 of her specific Will that says, "adjacent to
21 Plainfield." And adjacent, to me, means it's got to
22 touch the borders — and a lot of the students in our
23 town never had an opportunity to apply, of if they did
24 -- or weren't aware of it, or they were given out, and
25 I want to ensure that if — if the Judge makes a
 18

1 rulingf that the specifics of Ms. Lapsley's Will with

2 the word "adjacent" is being followed.
3 All right? She lived in this town. It was
4 after the riot. She had a choice. She could have
5 given them to J.F.K., or -- because J.F.K. was in
6 operation then, or she gave it to Muhlenberg -- and
7 there were a lot people in Plainfield, and I currently
8 still reside in Plainfield. I lived through the riots.
9 I live in the west end of town. A lot of people think
10 why do I live still in -- in the ^hood.' Pardon my
11 expression, but -- why do I live in the hood? I live
12 there because I like the diversity. And Ms. Lapsley
13 and a lot of these people that donated money understood
14 why they were giving it.
15 THE COURT: Can I just stop you? Because am
16 I doing anything with -- with the Will fund?
17 MR. CIESLA: The Lapsley Fund is not before
18 the Court.
19 MS. PIWOWAR: Right.
20 THE COURT: Okay. That — that -- I can't —
21 MS. PIWOWAR: But I'm just making — but it's
22 on this document. Okay.
23 Well, then I'll go to the William Augustus
24 Muhlenberg Fund.
25 THE COURT: I'm sorry?

19

1 MS. PIWOWAR: William Augustus Muhlenberg

2 Fund. That fund was set up and, unfortunately, I
3 didn't bring the documentation with me, but there are
4 doctors that put $25,000 into that fund to endow the
5 hospital and there are current doctors, still alive,
6 that did put money into that fund. I can provide the
7 Court with --
8 THE COURT: Again, the same question. Am I
9 dealing with that?
10 MS. PIWOWAR: Yes. On this —
11 MR. CIESLA: Yes. That fund is before the
12 Court
13 THE COURT: Okay.
14 MS. PIWOWAR: That's fund 3025.
15 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
16 MS. PIWOWAR: Some of those doctors are still
17 alive. I think that maybe they should be asked what
18 they -- what -- what they would prefer.
19 Also, the Eugene Salvati Fund is -- is -- is
20 in here. Unfortunately, I can't -- oh, it's fund 3088.
21 Dr. Eugene Salvati is still alive. He resides in
22 Middlesex County. Maybe somebody should contact him
23 and ask him what he wants done with that fund. I did
24 not contact him, but I know that he's still alive.
25 And also, Fund 3093, Thelma Holcomb Memorial
 20
1 Fund, which as $1.4 million in it. Mr. Holcomb --
2 unfortunately, I didn't read his — his Will, but
3 Thelma Holcomb lived in Plainfield. She died on
4 January 9th, 1991. Her husband, Harley J. Holcomb,
5 died August 29th, 2001. And I know that they just want
6 to change the name and put it over to the -- to the
7 Muhlenberg -- change the name to Muhlenberg School of
8 Nursing.
9 So that fund is younger than twenty years.
10 It's also more than $250,000 And there are living
11 relatives alive. I was contacted by one of them
12 yesterday, by phone. He wants to ensure -- he -- first
13 of all, he wants to know how he addresses the Court,
14 because he lives out of State. He also wants to be
15 sure that his relatives' intent about scholarship funds
16 is continued, because I don't know what they're going
17 to use that fund for, and I just want to ensure that I
18 can report back to that gentleman that his family's
19 wishes are being -- being followed. Okay? Because he
20 specifically told me that it was for nursing school
21 scholarships. I know Ms. Dowe pointed out, Trinitas
22 also has a nursing school. So, you know, maybe --
23 maybe there should be some consideration to that, since
24 Trinitas has taken our -- our maternity cases.
25 Ms. Dowe also didn't point out that addiction

21

1 services were taken away and so were psych services.

2 So perhaps some of the other -- if any of these funds
3 went to that, whoever took our addiction services or
4 our -- or our psych services should be able to have
5 some of those funds, because those were the wishes of
6 some of the old-time Plainfielders and I'm here on
7 behalf of -- of their wishes.
8 And I do know that a relative of mine, which
9 I didn't realize, also donated to a fund, but their
10 funds are not listed in this, so I can't speak to that.
11 So there is some -- some history there.
12 THE COURT: Thank you.
13 MS. PIWOWAR: Thank you, Judge.
14 THE COURT: Gentlemen?
15 MR. CIESLA: The funds for the School of
16 Nursing, as I said, are not being repurposed. What
17 we're asking the Court is to approve the fact that the
18 School of Nursing is now being sponsored by J.F.K.
19 because it has the acute care license, not Muhlenberg
20 any longer. All of those funds --
21 THE COURT: I gather at some point in time
22 some decision was made it should go to -- the school
23 would go with J.F.K., not with Trinitas and --
24 " MR. CIESLA: No. The State statute requires
25
 22
1 THE COURT: Okay.
2 MR. CIESLA: — that the School of Nursing
3 has to be operated and sponsored by an acute care
4 hospital that has an acute care license.
5 THE COURT: And Trinitas does not?
6 MR. CIESLA: Trinitas does.
7 THE COURT: Okay.
8 MR. CIESLA: They're sponsoring their own
9 medical school. Their own -- pardon me -- their own
10 school of nursing. J.F.K. is sponsoring the School of
11 Nursing that is physically located on the Muhlenberg
12 campus .
13 THE COURT: Okay, okay. I got it.
14 MR. CIESLA: And it's a — it's a relatively
15 new building and it is, as I said, we're -- we're --
16 THE COURT: I think what I'm trying to — to
17 drive to is the decision whether to have J.F.K. handle
18 it or Trinitas handle it was done by somebody else
19 outside of my Courtroom --
20 MR. CIESLA: That's right.
21 THE COURT: — and approved by —
22 MR. CIESLA: The Commissioner of Health.
23 THE COURT: -- the Commissioner of Health and
24 it 's sort of out of my hands.
25 MR. CIESLA: Right. Right. That's —

23

1 THE COURT: I mean, I know it's out of my

2 hands.
3 MR. CIESLA: That's — and it's been
4 sustained by the Appellate Division.
5 THE COURT: Okay. All right.
6 MR. CIESLA: Okay. That -- that -- so that
7 litigation is over, but what I'm driving at for — for
8 the purposes before you is we're not asking to
9 repurpose any of the funds for the School of Nursing.
10 All we're asking is -- is recognition and approval --
11 THE COURT: Uh-huh.
12 MR. CIESLA: — that it's being operated
13 consistent with the health care -- the — the acute
14 care license of J.F.K. and not the acute care license
15 of Muhlenberg Regional Medical Center, which has been
16 closed.
17 THE COURT: Okay.
18 MR. CIESLA: Okay? There are other funds
19 that aren't addressed here that either do not need
20 Court approval, because they have no restrictions in
21 them, or they have been approved by the Attorney
22 General's Office, consistent with the statute, because
23 they're over twenty years and -- and under $250,000.
24 Now, so that there's no misunderstanding, the
25 entity that holds these funds — the legal entity which
 24

1 holds these funds is either the Muhlenberg Regional

2 Medical Center, a not-for-profit, 501c3, or the
3 Muhlenberg Foundation, again, a not-for-profit, 501c3.
4 None of these funds are held by J.F.K. or any J.F.K.
5 other entity. Those are the two -- I just gave you the
6 two entities which actually hold the funds.
7 The application is being made and it's been
8 approved by the Board of each of the -- of those
9 entities -- by those entities. They're asking that
10 they be permitted to apply the funds for the repurpose
11 of locating the satellite emergency room, the
12 laboratory, radiology, M.I.C.U. and basic life support
13 services to another location on the Muhlenberg campus
14 to continue to fund and -- and they provide healthcare
15 service to the Muhlenberg population.
16 THE COURT: Okay.
17 MR. CIESLA: That's all I have.
18 THE COURT: Thank you. Anything?
19 MR. GANZMAN: Yes. Actually, I — I — I
20 guess the only comment I have is, to the extent that we
21 consented to the repurposing of funds that were more
22 than 20 years old and less than $250,000, I guess my
23 question for plaintiff is to the extent that the
24 grantor of these funds is still alive and could make
25 his or her intention known as to how they wanted the

25

1 funds to be used, that's something that I would think

2 you would want to determine.
3 " So my understanding was that all the funds we
4 consented to, there -- there was even -- either no gift
5 instrument or no trustee or grantor to talk to about
6 how they wanted the funds to be used in the future. So
7 to the extent there are any funds where a grantor is
8 still alive or there's some other information about
9 their — about how the funds could be used, you know, I
10 think it's up to the Foundation or the Medical Center
11 to contact those people and make a determination as to
12 whether or not they differ with where you want the
13 funds to be used.
14 MR. CIESLA: To -- to answer to that question
15 is there are some funds that aren't here because we
16 have identified the donor --
17 MR. GANZMAN: Right.
18 MR. CIESLA: -- and/or who has given the
19 funds and given the funds with restrictions. Those
20 donors are being contacted directly. We didn't bring
21 them into this litigation because why do I want to sue
22 the people who made donations?
23 THE COURT: Yes. You work -- it's going to
24 make you look bad.
25 MR. CIESLA: So -- so those are being handled
 26
1 separately. Individuals who may have -- may have made
2 a contribution, and we have different funds where we
3 have track records -- some records would show that the
4 average contribution was $25. There's no restriction
5
6 MR. GANZMAN: Uh-huh
7 MR. CIESLA: -- when those donations were
8 made.
9 MR. GANZMAN: Uh-huh.
10 MR. CIESLA: My understanding is they
11 reference certain doctors. When those donations were
12 made, they weren't made with restrictions. Yes. I'm
13 making a $25,000 donation or a $10,000 donation to the
14 Muhlenberg Fund.
15 MR. GANZMAN: Uh-huh.
16 MR. CIESLA: Okay. There's no restriction --
17 MR. GANZMAN: Uh-huh.
18 MR. CIESLA: — on — on that, other than
19 putting it in the Muhlenberg Fund. Now, the Muhlenberg
20 Fund, itself, we went through that -- was set up to
21 award plaques and -- and -- and provide other awards to
22 individuals who contribute to Muhlenberg Hospital.
23 It's -- it's a old fund. So, we do not --
24 MR. GANZMAN: I'm — I'm sorry. So there's
25 no one grantor to (inaudible).

27

1 MR. CIESLA: No. No.

2 THE COURT: Well, how about the Dr. Salvati
3 Fund? I mean, he's alive? Who —
4 MR. CIESLA: Right. That — again — okay.
5 MR. BURD: I can -- I can speak to that, Your
6 Honor. That's actually in our brief. The fund was --
7 this fund was created from funds contributing in honor
8 of Dr. Salvati and it was specifically to be used -- or
9 supposed to be exclusively for colon and rectal
10 treatments which are no longer performed at Muhlenberg.
11 Because the services are no longer offered, that's why
12 we've indicated the fund has been frustrated.
13 MR. CIESLA: Let me — one of the things --
14 THE COURT: And I might also add if he says
15 he lives in Middlesex County, that's within the State
16 where we have public notice having been placed in the
17 Star Ledger. All right.
18 MR. CIESLA: Let me -- one other point, Your
19 Honor. We did have the option -- or my client did have
20 the option, and that is to say we can repurpose those
21 funds for colo-rectal surgery that is now being done at
22 J.F.K. The Board elected not to repurpose any of those
23 funds for services being provided by other -- at other
24 locations. They wanted to repurpose the funds for
25 services that are being provided on the Muhlenberg
 28

1 campus. So that was their business decision. We want

2 to keep the money to provide services on the Muhlenberg
3 campus in Plainfield. We don't want to provide the
4 money to any other location outside of the Muhlenberg
5 campus for services that may have been designated in
6 the donation like -- like colon cancer. So they had to
7 make a decision. Do we want to provide services that
8 were referenced or do we want -- want to provide --
9 provide services on the Muhlenberg campus to the
10 Muhlenberg community?
11 THE COURT: Population.
12 MR. CIESLA: They made the decision. They
13 want to provide services on the Muhlenberg campus, to
14 the Plainfield and the -- and the Muhlenberg
15 population.
16 THE COURT: May I ask you to address one
17 thing which did catch my attention, and I don't know
18 that I can do anything about it, but their complaint
19 that scholarships are not going to Plainfield
20 residents, they're going to residents of other towns
21 that are not contiguous. What do you know about that?
22 MR. CIESLA: I know — other than that they
23 -- the -- the -- the -- the Board at the Foundation or
24 the Regional Medical Center provides scholarships every
25 year, I know nothing further than that. I -- I don't

29

1 -- I don't participate in that.

2 As -- as I think the plain -- the pro se
3 defendant's pointed out from a meeting, the client --
4 my client is looking into that to determine --
5 " THE COURT: Your client being?
6 MR. CIESLA: My -- my client being Muhlenberg
7 Regional Medical Center and Muhlenberg Foundation.
8 THE COURT: Both — both are your clients?
9 MR. CIESLA: Yes.
10 THE COURT: Do you know what -- what funds in
11 particular were used for scholarship? Were they
12 designated funds or?
13 " MR. CIESLA: Well, there are a couple
14 different funds. There -- there were -- there were
15 certain funds that we used for scholarships for the
16 School of Nursing. Those aren't the ones that the --
17 that the pro se raised. The funds that the pro se
18 raised were funds that were being used for scholarships
19 for individuals going to medical school. So,
20 obviously, they're not going to a medical school --
21 " THE COURT: In Plainfield, right.
22 MR. CIESLA: — at the Muhlenberg campus.
23 There's no medical school there.
24 THE COURT: Oh, okay. All right.
25 MR. CIESLA: Okay?
 30

1 THE COURT: Okay. All right. Either of you

2 have anything you'd like to say?
3 MS. PIWOWAR: Yeah. Judge, I appreciate the
4 opportunity.
5 My question is how do we get real
6 transparency of that and -- and how does the public
7 ensure -- like your question about the scholarships, is
8 being enforced? Who -- who, as members of the public,
9 do we make sure enforces Ms. Lapsley's Will, other than
10 taking something to Court or filing a charge against
11 them or whatever?
12 But when I was at the meeting, it was
13 representatives of J.F.K. there, who they said they
14 were part of the Muhlenberg, but we still don't even
15 know who the Muhlenberg Board is. At least three --
16 three of the people on the Muhlenberg Board, two
17 ladies, passed away recently, and one gentleman from
18 the City of Plainfield had to step down because he took
19 a -- he took a position as a -- a financial officer for
20 the City of Plainfield. So that's at least three
21 members and the public has no transparency and that's
22 what we're asking for, transparency, because right at
23 this point, we had to come here to get some semblance
24 of transparency.
25 THE COURT: Okay. All right.

31

1 MS. PIWOWAR: Thank you, Judge.

2 THE COURT: Mr. Gorzman [sic]?
3 MR. GANZMAN: Ganzman.
4 THE COURT: Ganzman. Members of the Board
5 and Foundation must be listed somewhere. Can you get?
6 MR. GANZMAN: I probably have that
7 information. Since they represent --
8 MS. DOWE: How do we get that?
9 THE COURT: Working on it right now.
10 MR. CIESLA: I would — I would think that
11 the Foundation and the Board is --
12 THE COURT: It must be public.
13 MR. CIESLA: That -- that information is --
14 is filed -- yes. It's filed every year, with a 990.
15 So —
16 THE COURT: What the 990?
17 MR. CIESLA: The IRS mandatory requiring --
18 filing, and that's public.
19 " THE COURT: Okay. Well --
20 MR. CIESLA: Anybody can -- anybody can
21 access that.
22 THE COURT: Okay. So it's -- if I want to
23 know that -- if you want to know that, we contact the
24 IRS. I'm sure there's a form, and the 990 is going to
25 say — tell us?
 32

1 MR. GANZMAN: Actually, it's public. There's

2 a number of public websites, GuideStar.com.
3 THE COURT: Oh. Write this down, quick. If
4 you haven't done it already.
5 MR. GANZMAN: I can give them -- I can give
6 those. Yes.
7 MS. DOWE: I have their 990s and even in
8 their most recent 990s, there are dead people listed.
9 THE COURT: Well, if it's — if they only
10 died in the last year, that's okay. It only has to be
11 done once a year.
12 MS. DOWE: I — I — I believe that the
13 Boards of the Foundation and Muhlenberg Regional
14 Medical Center have not been legally constituted,
15 according to their own by-laws, for years now. I
16 believe that they are mirror boards and the same
17 people, in fact in sworn testimony before the
18 Plainfield Planning Board. The only sworn testimony
19 we've heard. The question was asked who owns
20 Muhlenberg? And the answer given was that -- this was
21 about the property. The answer given was that
22 Muhlenberg owns the land, the Anthony Yelencsics
23 (phonetic) J.F.K. Community Hospital is the tenant of
24 Muhlenberg Hospital, and that all of the Boards have
25 been combined. And I can get you the CD or whatever

33

1 from the Planning Board testimony to -- to -- to verify

2 that, but that does not constitute legally constituted
3 Boards.
4 THE COURT: Okay. Well, let me just stop you
5 because your -- I have an issue here and you're over
6 here.
7 MS. DOWE: But it ~ the ~
8 THE COURT: I — I can appreciate you have
9 the concern, but I'm not empowered to answer it.
10 MS. DOWE: But this could be a fraudulent
11 filing by nonexistent corporations.
12 " THE COURT: It -- then — well, then you
13 better file some papers and do something -- and start a
14 Court action, but I don't have that in front of me. I
15 have a very minor issue in front of me, relatively
16 speaking.
17 Let me start out by saying I think the two
18 pro se defendants have an understanding the rest of you
19 do not. And I have a little bit of it. I lived in
20 Plainfield for ten years. I still have friends in
21 Plainfield. It is a lovely community with very proud
22 civic-minded citizens and the point you are making,
23 people for generations have been giving money. I know
24 when I moved in, I was hearing some names I had never
25 heard and -- and even today, as I pick up the paper
 34

1 once in a while, I still see that. So I am -- I am

2 very sensitive to your concern with regard to that. I
3 suppose every town is like that, but I just happen to
4 know Plainfield.
5 Similarly, I very much see the problem with
6 healthcare. We have a very big city. It is of concern
7 to Plainfield -- that is just a mirror image of what is
8 happening all over the State and the country. Our
9 hospitals are shrinking. We are, therefore, losing
10 coverage for populations. The point being made it's
11 happen more often to minority populations may well be
12 true. I'm not -- I'm not really commenting on it other
13 than, yes, I hear that.
14 But what I can do today is very limited.
15 It's whether or not these funds can be repurposed.
16 That's all I'm doing. And, frankly, I -- I'll give you
17 an opinion on it, but I do find the application is
18 appropriate and I am going to permit it.
19 I wanted to hear from you, though, because I
20 knew, as I said, community-minded citizens you are and
21 you are rightfully standing in front of us trying to
22 figure out what's going on here? But a lot of your
23 questions, for example, who owns Muhlenberg and what's
24 in the paper? I have no idea what's in the newspaper.
25 I -- I have seen the newspaper report on things I have

35

1 done and I swear I say to my husband look at this.

2 They weren't even in the room. They have no idea what
3 I did. It could be the same kind of thing. I -- I
4 just don't know. I can't address that.
5 But I am hearing your frustration. Saying,
6 I'm not really the person to help you out here, though.
7 A lot of this seems to be more of a -- an executive
8 branch function, or you may have some legislative
9 concerns, but it's not judicial. I just deal -- I'm
10 only allowed to deal with what's in front of me.
11 I kind of went a little beyond the ropes a
12 little bit because some things interested me -- the
13 scholarship issues. I wanted to make sure the citizens
14 of Plainfield were being fairly handled and it wasn't
15 being lost in any way. But, again, nothing's in front
16 of me.
17 And I think the most telling fact, as I look
18 at all of this, is the Boards are approving both of
19 these. The Boards, the people who have been trusted
20 with this money, are telling me it's the thing to do
21 and the Attorney General, who is also entrusted with
22 watching our money, is telling us what to do.
23 So, that's what I'm deciding. That's why I'm
24 deciding it, and it's all I can do. Thank you.
25 MR. CIESLA: Thank you, Judge.
 36

1 MR. BURD: Your Honor, I've prepared a -- a

2 Final Order, just so --
3 THE COURT: I have the Order, but to tell you
4 the truth, I —
5 MR. BURD: I had to update it because we
6 changed --
7 " THE COURT: Oh, okay. Yes.
8 MR. BURD: Because the -- for instance, the
9 dates of things changed. The -- we didn't know what we
10 were going to publish it in, what newspapers at the
11 time.
12 THE COURT: I want to do a bit of a statement
13 of reasons. Thank you.
14 (Proceedings Concluded)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

37

1 CERTIFICATION
2
3 I, Rebecca Y. Natal, the assigned
4 transcriber, do hereby certify the foregoing transcript
5 of proceedings, Digitally Recorded, Index Number
6 9:25:42 to 10:01:19 is prepared in full compliance with
7 the current Transcript Format for Judicial Proceedings
8 and is a true and accurate compressed transcript of the
9 proceedings as recorded.
10
11
12 February 18, 2015
13

16
17 Rebecca Y. Natal AD/T 557
18
19 AUTOMATED TRANSCRIPTION SERVICES
20 Laurel Springs, NJ
21
22
23
24
25