Guess who’s in court trying to force Chatham to bring back the big Redevelopment Plan to allow up to 720 more apartments on the Ivy end of River Road?
Screenshot
That’s right:The one now pushing another big Redevelopment Plan is AJDM, the very same Ivy-affiliated developer Chatham just gave the green light to build a small, 100-apartment project on the same part of River Road!https://chathamchoice.org/2026/06/__trashed/
But why? Isn’t AJDM happy with the project it was pushing all last spring? Didn’t the Mayor suggest that project would satisfy everyone?
Looks like that project was simply a. ploy. Now AJDM won’t give up until the Council adopts a Redevelopment Plan so that AJDM can build many more apartments on the same property, and also likely get Mayor &. Council to grant a PILOT, excusing AJDM from paying any property taxes.
And on 8/28/26 Fair Share Housing Center joined the fray.
Screenshot
Why exactly would our Mayor & Council want to grant yet another developer like AJDM a free pass not to pay property taxes like the rest of us?
Would you pay someone to pave over most of a unique, green, wooded, taxpayer-owned parcel next to Memorial Park without first carefully considering the alternatives?
That’s exactly what your elected Mayor & Council plan to do on your dime.
Think you can’t help that? Sure you can. Two ways:
Tell your elected representatives you expect them to schedule a public forum BEFORE they hire a contractor to chop down the trees and pave over 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to home plate at Memorial Park, behind the Library.
bhargrove@chathamborough.org
cdempsey@chathamborough.org
jmathiasen@chathamborough.org
jstrickland@chathamborough.org
khay@chathamborough.org
kkoronkiewicz@chathamborough.org
mgilmore@chathamborough.org
2. Show you care: Show up for the next public Council meeting on Monday, September 28, 2026, anytime after 7:30 pm, either
in-person at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue; or
by phone or Zoom, using the links to be posted in the calendar at www.ChathamBorough.org
Come as you are, whenever convenient. No need to sign in. Sit where you please. Pay no attention to the boring parts. Leave whenever you feel like it. SPEAKING IS OPTIONAL, but you may hear some great ones.
Now that the Borough has the all-important Certificate of Compliance, permitting the Mayor & Council to consider improving their Fair Share plan, when will they schedule the long-awaited public forum to answer basic, unanswered questions and consider alternatives to paving over the green, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park?
What are the realistic alternatives? If buying another lot to preserve 58 North Passaic would cost the average homeowner no more than $122 per year for ten years, is it worth the price?
What about other Borough-owned properties that are NOT vacant and right next to a park? Maybe consider repurposing one that’s underused and costing taxpayers a fortune to maintain?
Face it: if you allow the Mayor & Council to sacrifice the unique, green, taxpayer-owned parcel next to the public park without answering even basic questions, you will have given up all hope of having any say in any other local issue in the future.
Don’t let that happen.
Tell your elected representatives you expect them to schedule a public forum BEFORE they hire a contractor to chop down the trees and pave 58 North Passaic Avenue:
ANOTHER UPDATE: Instead of paving Front Street to the dead end as announced in the letter (below) dated July 31, 2026, the Borough chose to pave only part of Front Street, skipping the end leading to the parcel supposedly “inaccessible” as shown here:
UPDATE: “Due to a contractor delay, paving on… Front Street has been rescheduled for Monday, August 10, 2026, from 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., weather permitting…”
In the past, our Council tried to increase the property tax base by selling surplus, tax-exempt, Borough-owned land, including the vacant, 0.62-acre parcel just south of the train tracks at 39 Front Street:
Though 39 Front Street remains vacant and tax-exempt, it’s now called “rear of 16 Walnut St,” or “16 Walnut Street, rear”and the Mayor has deemed it “inaccessible”:
How can a parcel with a 50′ frontage on a downtown public street be called “inaccessible”?
Is the trouble that that end of Front Street isn’t paved?
If so, that will soon be remedied. A few days ago the Mayor’s Department of Public Works announced its plans to pave the dead end of Front Street:
Now at last our Mayor & Council can finally hold a public forum on their decision to pave 80% of the unique, green, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to our Memorial Park!
Aerial view of vacant, wooded, taxpayer-owned 58 N. Passaic, marked to show site chosen by Council for construction of 4-apartment, 7-parking space project. Source: Google images
What do the Mayor & Council plan to do with that wooded parcel? They plan to chop down most of the trees to build four apartments and seven parking spaces:
Diagram of the 4-apartment, 7-parking space project designed for the vacant, 0.3-acre parcel at 58 North Passaic. Source: PowerPoint first revealed to the Planning Board on May 7, 2025, outlining the Fourth Round Affordable Housing Plan created by an insider-only committee that met behind closed doors, kept no records, and even left the Council in the dark until late April, 2025.
Wait. What?!
For the past year, residents have been asking how the Council had chosen that site for the project, how much it will cost taxpayers, and the pros and cons of the alternatives.
Residents got few answers. Borough experts said the Mayor & Council could not consider alternatives until a judge had certified the Borough’s affordable housing plan.
Now Judge Allen has officially certified the Borough’s housing plan:
That means now our Mayor & Council can finally hold that public forum and residents can finally get the facts on the plan to sacrifice 58 North Passaic Avenue.
The only question is, when?
Should our Mayor & Council hold the public forum right away? At their regular meeting on August 10, 2026? Maybe in September, when most residents are back in town?
Tell your Mayor & Council what you prefer, using these addresses:
The storm that swept the Chathams last Friday, July 3rd wrecked havoc with our plans and our lives. It also underscored our total dependence on regular electrical service.
Chatham only began to dabble with the stuff in 1901 when, after careful analysis, bidding, and informed public debate, voters approved a proposal to build a municipal electric plant to light the streets.
That kind of timely, meaningful, public review is exactly what today’s Borough Council should do before embarking on major projects.
Chatham Press, May 18, 1901
The new electrical utility got residents to sample electric lighting by offering to supply the wiring and the fixtures:
Screenshot of ad in Chatham Press, September 14, 1901
Everybody got hooked. By 1920, even a brief power outage was more than a minor inconvenience:
Screenshot of Chatham Press, Saturday, May 29, 1920, p. 1
Why doesn’t today’s Borough Council include residents in such big decisions?
UPDATE: Recent developments have shed new light on the events described below, revealing important facts. They are incorporated to help explain what this situation means for Chatham Borough as of October 5, 2026.
At that meeting, our Borough Council stunned observers by voting DOWN a big Redevelopment Plan the Mayor & Council had been pushing hard for more than two years.https://chathamchoice.org/2024/06/visioning/
Why would the Council vote down a pet project?What the heck is going on here?
The Mayor said the Council voted down the Plan because of a more recent proposalby AJDM Chatham, LLCto build apartments on River Road under existing zoning law, meaning without the lucrative PILOT property tax exemption and other special incentives available under a redevelopment plan.
What all that means is when the Mayor & Council first presented the new River Road Redevelopment Plan to the public, they already knew what the AJDM was preparing to build without the benefit of such a plan or a PILOT tax exemption.
So contrary to the Mayor’s explanation, seeing the developer’s proposal cannot be the reason the Council chose to reject its pet Plan at the June 22 meeting. So why did they?
To figure out what’s actually going on here, it helps to know how the Plan for River Road got on the agenda, and the effect of its rejection.
First, though the Mayor & Council had spent years angling for a new Plan for River Road, they probably were dismayed when, in December 2025, the compulsory affordable housing program virtually forced them to propose such a plan on command.
A December 9, 2025 settlement agreement with Fair Share and a big developer provided for unpleasant consequences if before July 1, 2026 the Borough Council didn’t adopt a plan for River Road and hinted that it had better provide for high-density apartment buildings.
So in April 2026, the Mayor & Council did propose a Plan, and it would have allowed up to 720 new, high-density apartments near the Ivy on River Road.
While residents struggled to understand that Plan, AJDM’s 100-apartment proposal was before the Planning Board. Some assumed it was a backup plan, in case the Council did not adopt the Redevelopment Plan. Others guessed that proposal was a bargaining chip, intended to prod the Council to adopt the Redevelopment Plan to get their hands on PILOT revenue.
Nobody expected what happened next.
Our Council’s June 22, 2026 vote to reject the River Road Plan triggered consequences under another decision our Council approved at that same June 22, 2026 meeting, agreeing to a court order that wasn’t included in the agenda package posted online, and the public couldn’t see until it was filed with the court the following day.
The mysterious document the Council approved was a court order that set the terms of the Certificate of Compliance the Borough needed to gain immunity from lawsuits over its affordable housing policy for 2025-2035.
That order, which the court would ok a few days later on June 26, 2026, gave the Borough until July 1, 2026 to decide whether or not to adopt the Plan for River Road. It also gave others up to 30 days to weigh in on that decision.
By simultaneously embracing that court order and rejecting the River Road Plan, our Council opened the door to challenges to the Certificate of Compliance and demands for ever higher density zoning on River Road.
That wasn’t necessarily a bad move. Our Mayor & Council needed that Certificate to protect the Borough. They would have be fools to rubber stamp a Plan allowing up to 720 new apartments on River Road, even if rejecting it might possibly trigger an objection by some would-be developer.
And some observers discounted that risk, believing the pending application by AJDM to build 100 more apartments on River Road proved that the current zoning density is sufficient to attract development. No wonder the Planning Board so eagerly approved AJDM’s application a few weeks later, on July 16, 2026. chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=532
All good, right?
Surprise! Less than two weeks after getting that approval, AJDM itself filed an objection to the Compliance Certificate, claiming essentially that the level of density that had attracted it to River Road was NOT sufficient to attract development. The Borough must adopt another Redevelopment Plan, allowing higher-density housing.
If anyone can handle this situation, it’s the Borough’s longtime affordable housing lawyer. But he isn’t the one who decides whether to stand firm or cave and adopt a very high-density Redevelopment Plan for the rest of River Road. That’s up to our Mayor & Council.
Let’s jus hope they’re equal to the task.
Meanwhile, the Borough’s Fourth Round housing plan seems to be on hold.
Have you seen your latest Chatham Borough tax bill?
Then you’ve also seen Mayor Dempsey’s enclosed letter, full of rumors, myths, and misinformation about the Borough’s plan to pave over the wooded, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue.
Screenshot: Borough’s drawing of the project to be built on the wooded taxpayer-owned parcel. at 58 N Passaic shown in the Google aerial image above. Source: outline presented to the Planning Board on May 7, 2025, of Plan unveiled June 5, 2025, adopted June 18, 2025, and submitted to the state without public explanation or vote by the Borough Council.
The Mayor’s letter doesn’t answer any of the questions driving the growing demand for a public forum on that project.
Why would the Mayor wish to pave that green lot, right next to our Memorial Park?
How much will that project cost Borough taxpayers?
What are the alternatives?
What are the pros and cons?
Tell the Mayor & Council you expect straight answers:
attend the public Council meetings on Monday, June 22, and Monday, July 13, 2026, 7:30 pm, at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level. (Come as you are, whenever you can. Sit where you like and leave when you please. Speaking is optional.)
Don’t accept the usual nonsense:
MYTH: The Borough must develop 58 North Passaic to meet the state’s affordable housing quota.
REALITY: The state did not target 58 North Passaic for development. It was selected by eight Borough insiders who met only behind closed doors and claim they kept no records. All we know is they had many alternatives, including some on Main Street, whether or not they considered those options.
MYTH: Developing 58 North Passaic would help the Borough meet its affordable housing quota at no cost to taxpayers.
REALITY: Nothing is free. That project would cost the Borough that. parcel and Borough taxpayers would be ultimately responsible for ALL of the costs of building, operating, and maintaining the North Passaic project, as the Council agreed on March 9, 2026.
MYTH: Developing 58 North Passaic is the only way to meet the Borough’s affordable housing quota without buying land.
REALITY: Of course, there are other options. One disadvantage of building the project at 58 North Passaic is it would mean the permanent loss of trees, fresh air, natural habitats, and the opportunity to use that land to benefit all residents.
MYTH: The only alternative to developing 58 North Passaic would be a much bigger project, with much higher density.
REALITY: In fact, the Mayor’s contractor is willing to build the same project, with the same bonus credits, at ANY location in the Borough.
MYTH:There is no other potential location.
REALITY: The viable options include both other Borough-owned land and privately-owned sites.
MYTH: It is too late to consider alternatives to developing 58 North Passaic Avenue.
REALITY: In fact, it is too early to consider alternatives. The Borough cannot propose one until after receiving its Certificate of Compliance.
MYTH: Even proposing an alternative to developing 58 North Passaic would put the Borough at great risk of lawsuits.
REALITY: If it were risky to propose an alternative, the Borough’s experts would have warned about that when they spoke at the Planning Board hearing on June 18, 2025 and at the Council meeting on December 8, 2025. They didn’t. The affordable housing lawyer and planner warned only that such a proposal must wait until after the Borough receives its Certificate of Compliance.
MYTH: It would take too long to select and develop another location.
REALITY: We haven’t seen any evidence to back up that claim.
Myth: Buying a privately-owned lot as an alternative site for the project would be expensive – too expensive for taxpayers.
REALITY: With an irreplaceable, taxpayer-owned asset at stake, the question is not whether buying an alternative site would cost us, but whether it’s cost-effective: Is preserving one of the last few green spots in town worth that? The Mayor can’t say. She chooses not even to estimate the cost to the typical homeowner.
MYTH: Environmentalists are trying to force the Mayor &. Council to spend our money to preserve the tree canopy at 58 North Passaic Avenue.
REALITY: All we are asking the Mayor & Council to do is to hold off paving over that green lot until after a public forum, where people can get basic facts, ask questions, and get answers. The Mayor & Council can do that at no cost to taxpayers now that a local has offered to pay the experts’ hourly fees. If 58 North Passaic turns out to be the best choice for Chatham, so be it.
MYTH: The questions about the 58 North Passaic project have been asked and answered at many Council meetings.
REALITY: While residents have been asking questions, the Mayor &. Council have not disclosed even basic facts, such as cost estimates and the viable alternatives rejected without explanation.
Enough is enough. Demand an answer:
When will the Council hold a public forum on the plan for 58 North Passaic Avenue?
attend the public Council meetings on Monday, June 22, and Monday, July 13, 2026, 7:30 pm, at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level. (Come as you are, whenever you can. Sit where you like and leave when you please.
