Monthly Archives: March 2023

Winds of change?

Can your town suddenly decide to zone one lot differently from its neighbors?

No. That’s “spot-zoning.” It’s illegal in New Jersey.

But there is an exception if the lot is arguably “blighted” or “in need of redevelopment,” according to a state law designed to help poor towns attract new construction.

The Local Redevelopment & Housing Law lists eight types of situations that can justify deeming a place “in need of redevelopment” and as such not subject to normal zoning laws: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/title-40a/section-40a-12a-5/

For years, real estate developers have abused that exception to achieve a kind of legalized spot zoning:

  • They’ve used it to get around normal zoning laws in towns that have no trouble attracting investors.
  • They’ve used it to sweep away normal zoning rules for properties that aren’t blighted at all.
  • They’ve used it to qualify for whopping property tax breaks that enrich the developers at the expense of residents.
  • Sometimes they’ve used it to get title to public land without the normal checks and balances.

The courts usually turn a blind eye to that kind of abuse.

One noteworthy exception is the 2007 case of Gallenthin v. Paulsboro, in which the state Supreme Court made clear that the mere fact that a property is operated in a less than optimal manner does not make it “stagnant and unproductive” within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5(e).

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/2007/a-51-06-doc.html

Now it seems the Court is beginning to tighten up the criteria for designating a property “in need of redevelopment” on the grounds that it is “dilapidated, obsolete, overcrowded” or has “other deleterious conditions.”

In a case published this month, Malanga v. Township of West Orange, the Court rejected the designation of the West Orange library as an “area in need of redevelopment” within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5(d) simply because it was old, out of style, and needed repair. The Court also put to rest the idea that the mere assertion that a place is dilapidated, obsolescent, etc. will suffice, or that courts should defer to the township’s judgment on that score.

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/supreme-court/2023/a-45-21.html

The Malanga case establishes that to satisfy N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-5(d), the township must show both:

1) evidence of “dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout”; and

2) that, as a result, the premises “are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.”

Great news for anyone concerned about reckless overdevelopment.

What effect will the Malanga case have on areas already designated in need of redevelopment? Ask an expert:

What would you like to see in the center of Chatham Borough?

Come see what the developer has in mind for Post Office Plaza, and share your views with the Historic Preservation Commission:

Tuesday March 21, 7:30 pm, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level.

Here’s what they’re considering:

https://chathamborough.org/component/dpcalendar/event/historic-preservation-3-1679441400?Itemid=809

Priorities & accountability

UPDATE: Turned out Captain Penn was 100% right about the Borough’s emergency need for new fire vehicles, according to the November. 2023 report by the experts the Council paid to study the issue. On July 8, 2024, the Council voted to spend $1.2 million on a new truck, some 40% more than it would have cost if they’d acted when first alerted to the issue.

Why would our Chatham Borough Council even consider gifting our River Road PILOT money to anyone when we’re in such desperate need of fire trucks and other necessities?

That was the elephant in the room at the Monday, 3/13 meeting of our Borough Council.

River Road

The elephant got loose during a presentation by a principal of BNE, the developer of the massive, stick-built apartment project going up at the corner of Watchung Avenue and River Road.

Asked if our volunteer fire department has the equipment, the manpower, and the training necessary to fight a real fire at River Road, the presenter, a principal with the developer, BNE Real Estate Group, said, “Yes, currently Chatham Borough has what they need to fight a fire in that building.” See the video linked below starting about 1:18:00.

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=119

Is that true? No.

Brave, dedicated, and skilled as they are, our volunteer firefighters need more personnel, more training, and far newer fire trucks than Chatham Borough has – or can provide anytime soon, according to longtime, respected Borough resident Robert Penn, a former captain in the Bloomfield Fire Department who worked in the fire service for 44 years and has taught classes in Building Construction and Advanced Firefighting Tactics and Strategy. (Go to minute 37:46 in the following video:0)

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=106

Chatham’s fire trucks are so old and obsolete that they pose a risk to the safety of residents and fire fighters alike, says Penn.

https://patch.com/new-jersey/chatham/fire-safety-concerns-prompt-chatham-resident-call-new-equipment

In the event of a real fire at the River Road development, our volunteers would have to wait for help from surrounding towns.

The problem isn’t new or partisan. It dates back at least a decade, when the other political party controlled the Council. It will take years to get the necessary equipment.

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/a-firefighter-s-response-to-mathiasen-s-letter-on-post-office-plaza

https://www.newjerseyhills.com/robert-penn-requests-chatham-look-into-replacing-outdated-apparatus/image_f38c5cac-6f49-5c16-acb2-4ced7f6655ba.html

https://www.newjerseyhills.com/chatham_courier/news/chatham-to-hire-consultant-to-help-craft-fire-apparatus-replacement-plan/article_1bbc2229-7f63-521e-a17a-a33703f740d9.html

Popular Borough Council Member Len Resto is working on getting the fire trucks we need. It will cost a bundle. The Council should use our PILOT money for tax relief and fire trucks, not for gifts. Certainly not without the informed consent of Chatham residents.

That the Council would even consider giving away our PILOT money without our consent is mind boggling. It’s a great example of what can happen when we don’t hold our elected representatives accountable for their decisions.

If the Council explains the situation, and residents vote to give away our PILOT money anyway, that’s their choice. But residents are entitled to know what’s at stake before any decisions are made.

Check out this letter:

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/it-s-our-money-use-borough-pilot-revenues-to-reduce-property-taxes-and-cover-necessities

For more information, click here:

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/chatham-borough-council-do-the-right-thing-concerning-pilot-not-merely-what-s-legally-permissible-or-expedient

Do the right thing

What will Chatham Borough Council do with the Borough’s PILOT revenues from the River Road project?

Will the Council do the right thing?

Find out here: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/it-s-our-money-use-borough-pilot-revenues-to-reduce-property-taxes-and-cover-necessities


Learn more here: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/chatham-borough-council-do-the-right-thing-concerning-pilot-not-merely-what-s-legally-permissible-or-expedient

Attend the 3/13 Council meeting in person or on Zoom here: https://www.chathamborough.org/component/dpcalendar/event/mayor-council-meeting-13-1678750200?Itemid=809

Like to pay lower property taxes? Or at least not pay more than necessary?

New Jersey suffers the nation’s highest property taxes, and they usually increase at least 2% per year – plus whatever it takes to cover certain exempt expenses, like health care and pensions for retired municipal workers.

In Chatham Borough, our property taxes will continue to increase even more than 2% per year unless our Council gets smart, and chooses to spend the millions in revenues expected from River Road for necessities – and easing our tax burden – rather than for luxuries and gifts.