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:
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
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 options, including some on Main Street.
MYTH: Developing 58 North Passaic would help the Borough meet its affordable housing quota at no cost to taxpayers.
REALITY: Nothing is free. 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.
There is NO excuse for the Mayor & Council not to hold a public meeting to discuss the pros and cons of 58 North Passaic and the alternatives BEFORE they hire a contractor to pave over 80% of that vacant, taxpayer-owned nearly 0.3-acre, wooded parcel, right next to our primary recreation area, 6.9-acre Memorial Park.
We know the Mayor & Council have NO excuse not to hold that meeting, because if there were any excuse, it would be found in the piece Council member Jocelyn Mathiasen posted in the Patch on Friday, March 20, 2026 at 9:16 pm ET.
See for yourself in that piece, which is set forth in full below, with factual corrections interspersed in boldface:
“In recent weeks, a number of residents have been asking for a public hearing to explore alternatives to 58 N. Passaic for a small part of our affordable housing plan. In addressing this, I would like to correct the record on a few items:
Fact: “Correct” the record? No, the word is “spin.” You seek to spin the record.
The property is not a “de facto” extension of memorial park. It has been fenced and unused for well over a decade — before that it had a house.
Fact: More than 43 years ago in 1982, the Borough used taxpayer dollars to buy 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park, hoping to use that parcel for recreation. Last checked, the parcel is tax-exempt as a “playground”. For details, see: https://chathamchoice.org/2025/05/
The property will not be “mowed down” – most trees will be preserved, including a 15” buffer between the driveway and Memorial park.
Fact: “Most”? No, you HOPE to save ONE tree, as specified at the far left of the image show in the outline the Council presented to the Planning Board on 5/7/25 (if amended, please advise):
The Borough Council has received extensive feedback – and responded to it – related to 58 N. Passaic.
Fact: Getting “extensive feedback” is all the more reason the Council should hold a public forum to discuss the pros and cons and alternatives BEFORE hiring someone to pave over 80% of 58 North Passaic Avenue.
Most importantly, there is no viable alternative.
Fact: If not even ONE of the many known alternatives were “viable,” then the Council should WELCOME the opportunity to show residents why you ruled out each one. But just BTW, as you know very well, the Vacant Land Adjustment (VLA) used to justify the realistic development potential (RDP) is NO substitute for proper due diligence on possible sites for the 100% affordable project, including underused Borough lots and private property, including the lots for sale on Main Street.
For an alternative project to go forward, we would have to:
Fact: The Borough has on retainer (paid by taxpayers) several top experts who know how to do all of the following as efficiently as possible, assuming they need to be done at all, and if not, should explain why not in a public forum.
Find a private site with a willing seller who will wait a year or more for the purchase and will follow state procurement law.
Fact: Developing any site, including 58 North Passaic Avenue, would cost something.
Find a willing partner to develop the project with access to construction funding.
Fact: We have seen NO reason to think the Council’s current no-bid partner – or its construction funding – wouldn’t be available at an alternative sitein the Borough.
Submit this potential change to the Affordable Housing Program and get their approval (which is unlikely to be granted without some kind of sweetener)
Sweetener? If saving a green, public space like 58 North Passaic by investing millions of taxpayer dollars in an alternative site for affordable housing would’t qualify as a sweetener, what would?
Fact: Every choice involves tradeoffs. Borough residents, who will bear the burdens, deserve the opportunity to weigh in on the choices.
After the success of the above four tasks, we then need to revise our affordable housing plan and complete permitting with shovels in the ground only two years from today.
Fact: If, as claimed, this Council came up with a ten-year housing plan in a few months, this Council certainly can break ground on a small project in two years.
Assuming a generous 50% chance for each item, there is about a 6 percent chance that this would succeed, and it would cost a lot of time, money, and effort — and expose the Borough to serious risks.
Fact: What “serious risks”? That’s a brilliant combination of false precision and fear-mongering. You have shown NO evidence that the Borough’s expert lawyer ever warned of any such risk. Why not invite him to address that claim in a public forum – at no cost to taxpayers, as an individual has publicly offered to pay the legal fee?
The Borough is tackling many challenges for the betterment of our community. Diverting time to a disingenuous public meeting based on a false premise is not a good use of anyone’s time. Fact: You are spending countless hours holding multiple meetings where you argue against holding a public forum, instead of simply holding one meeting to put this issue to rest once and for all. Why? And, if history is any guide, the individuals most vocally calling for this event will then seek to turn it into a circus of insults, interruptions, personal attacks, and rhetorical “when did you stop beating your wife” questions.
Fact: No, the “individuals most vocally calling for this event” have merely urged the Council to hold a forum to consider the pros and cons and alternatives – or prove your claim that there are none – before needlessly sacrificing a unique, taxpayer-owned asset, one of the last vacant, green parcels in town, and right next to our large, central recreation area. Is that simple request what you call a “personal attack”?
Residents should know that the Borough is working through a more potentially impactful element of our affordable housing program, drafting and considering a redevelopment plan for River Road north of The Ivy by July 1. For this, we will be holding a number of public meetings, and these provide an important opportunity for the public to provide input. I will write more on that in the future, but keep an eye out for notices from the Borough.
Fact: If the Council can hold multiple public meetings to discuss plans for River Road, there is NO EXCUSE not to hold even one public meeting on the sacrifice of taxpayer-owned 58 North Passaic Avenue AFTER the court issues the Certificate of Compliance and BEFORE the Council hires the contractor to chop down the trees and pave over 80% of that vacant,green parcel, right next to Memorial Park.
As volunteers, Borough Council members don’t always have the time and wherewithal to fight the constant barrage of negative and misleading rhetoric and commentary from a small handful of residents, most of whom have much more free time than we do. We do have a smart, dedicated, caring, and thoughtful Council, and if something seems too absurd to be true, please reach out. It probably is.
Fact: If Council members are too busy to deal with a “constant barrage” from residents asking for a public meeting on 58 North Passaic Avenue, it would be far more efficient to hold one public forum than to go on holding multiple meetings with individual constituents and battling them on every available forum.
NOTE: Please tell our Mayor & Council that AFTER the court issues the Certificate of Compliance, we expect them to hold a public forum to discuss the pros and cons and alternatives to paving over the unique, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue BEFORE the Council hires the contractor to chop down the trees and pave over 80% of that vacant, green parcel right next to Memorial Park.
Have you heard that our local elected officials plan to pay someone to pave over and develop 80% of our unique, green, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to our Memorial Park, without ever having publicly discussed the alternatives.
They’d have you believe it’s too late to correct that mistake. Not so!
Once the court issues a Judgment of Compliance – probably by April, the Mayor & Council can propose preserving 58 North Passaic by swapping it out for another site. The Borough’s expert lawyer and planner have told us so at least twice.
Now our Mayor & Council can and SHOULD schedule a public meeting to discuss the pros and cons of alternative sites BEFORE they sign a contract to pave over80% of our unique, green, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to our Memorial Park.
That’s the right thing to do.
What can one person do to make sure the Mayor & Council do what’s right? Plenty:
1. Tell the Mayor & Council to schedule a public meeting to discuss options BEFORE they sign a contract to pave over 80% of our unique, green parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park.Email:
Before the Mayor & Council plunge ahead with plans to pave over our green, vacant, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park behind the Library, they need to GIVE US A FORUM to discuss the pros and cons and alternatives. There is no excuse to do otherwise.
Tell them so! Or at least show them you care about your hometown.
Have you heard that the sacrifice of the taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic is a “Done Deal”?
That’s an old trick called a “self-fulfilling prophecy.” Meaning if you can get enough naive people to go around repeating it, it becomes true.
In fact, there is NOTHING requiring our Mayor & Council to pave over the green, Borough taxpayer-owned parcel right next to Memorial Park.
They can just as well house the same four families at another site in town. Maybe repurpose another Borough-owned lot that isn’t vacant, green, or right next to a park.
Or they can acquire a privately-owned parcel for less than most households already spend on coffee or tea.
At the very least, the Mayor & Council should hold a public meeting to discuss alternativesbefore disposing of that irreplaceable Borough asset.
They are holding such a meeting to discuss options for the privately-owned project that will replace the Cottage Deli.It’s Wednesday Feb 11.
There is NO excuse not to give the same consideration to the permanent disposition of a unique, taxpayer-owned parcel right next to our Central Park.
Why do the Mayor & Council continue to refuse to schedule a public meeting to discuss alternatives to sacrificing taxpayer-owned 58 North Passaic?
Think it’s too late to save our green, wooded, Borough-owned 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to home plate at Memorial Park?
Assume that green gem is destined to be paved over for four apartments and a parking lotand nothing can be done about it?
That’s what some would have you believe. But it’s not so.
The Borough’s housing lawyer and planner have confirmed that the Borough can propose an alternative site for that development. We have no reason to think an alternative wouldn’t be accepted.
So, when will the Council consider and discuss alternatives to needlessly sacrificing 58 North Passaic Avenue?
See how the Mayor & Council answer that question at their public meeting this Monday, January 5, 2026, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue.
Please note: This is a public meeting, convened for the benefitof residents and taxpayers. You are the boss. Arrive at your convenience. Use the north entrance. Go left through the door. Take the elevator to the upper level. Enter the double doors at the end of the hall. Sit anywhere. Observe anonymously or participate during the Public Comment period if you prefer. Leave whenever you please.
Really can’t be there? (Working swing? Grounded? Under house arrest?) Zoom the meeting here:
Why are our Mayor and Borough Council so determined to pave over and permanently sacrifice the vacant, green, wooded, Borough-owned lot at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park?
At the December 8th Council meeting, a member prodded the Borough’s Professional Planner to say she had searched for another place to build affordable housing..
The hired-hand Planner complied, recalling a quest involving various locations that didn’t make the cut for one reason or another.
Only problem is, the Planner’s tale bore NO resemblance to the one she had told the Planning Board last May 7th, when she first outlined the Council’s housing plan.
At that May 7th meeting, when a Planning Board member asked about the process of choosing sites for development, the Planner did not claim to have considered alternatives, as shown in the official video starting at approximately 1:09:29 here:
Planning Board Member: “Can you just say a couple words about how [indecipherable you or we] ended up with these recommendations for parcels? Were there others that were triaged out? Just how did you decide these – that this was the optimal mix?”
Professional Planner: “Well, so, ah with regards to the 100% project [58 North Passaic Avenue] we knew that the Borough owned the property and we also had a non-profit developer that was interested in developing the property. So that was a nice marriage.”
Residents and taxpayers deserve better. You deserve better.
Tell the Mayor & Council you expect tosee options, get answers, and have a meaningful chance to weigh in BEFORE they sign a contract to pave and build on the vacant, green, Borough-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue, right next to Memorial Park:
Attend the next Council meeting, which is Monday, January 5, 2026, 7:30 pm at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue.
Come as you are, whenever’s convenient. You’ll find plenty of parking. Enter on the north side of the building. Take the elevator to the upper level. Use the big doors at the end of the hall. Make yourself comfortable. Speaking is optional. Leave when you please.
Do you know what’s happening in Chatham Borough? Find out before it’s too late. Attend the Borough Council Meeting:Monday, Oct. 27 🕢 7:30 pm 📍Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Ave.Or, at the very least, Zoom from the calendar at chathamborough.org
For years, Council candidate Karen Koronkiewicz enjoyed the loyal support of career firefighter and Ground Zero alum Captain Robert Penn, a respected longtime Borough resident.
Not anymore.
Now even Captain Penn has washed his hands of Karen and her political bosses, in part over their mishandling of the new Housing Element of the Master Plan.
Karen played a big role in that fiasco.She is on the back room committee that opted to let an unspecified developer pave over 58 North Passaic Avenue, the green, Borough-owned lot right next to home plate in Memorial Park.
Though she represents the Council on the Borough Shade Tree Commission, Karen dismissed that wooded lot as “useless” and agreed to sacrifice all but one tree without first weighing the alternatives or taking public input.
At the October meeting of the Shade Tree Commission, Karen flatly refused to explain why she had withheld that pubic news from her Commission colleagues, including her own running mate Miles Gilmore.Could the reason for her silence have something to do with the location of the most obvious alternative site?
With Karen’s re-election at stake, the rest of the one-party controlled Mayor & Council aren’t talking either. They would have you believe they cannot talk about it because it’s in litigation and settlement talks. That’s utter nonsense.
In fact, there’s no gag order, and settlement talks are NO excuse not to explore alternatives in executive session, so the Mayor & Council will be prepared to update the public on alternatives once Chatham Borough receives its Judgment of Compliance and Repose, likely in January.
It’s high time the Mayor & Council did the right thing: consider alternative ways to satisfy the Borough’s housing quotas without sacrificing the green lot right next to home plate in Memorial Park.
How can one person help persuade them to consider the alternatives? It’s easy.
Attend the Council Meeting:📅 Monday, Oct. 27 🕢 7:30 pm 📍 Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Ave. Take the elevator to upper level. Enter the last room on the left. (Your presence matters. Speaking is optional.)
If it turns out that 58 North Passaic Avenue is the best bet, then so be it. But to hand that lot to a developer without due diligence would be unconscionable.
Despite growing public opposition, the Mayor & Council still aim to sacrifice the wooded, Borough-owned lot at 58 North Passaic Avenue – right next to Memorial Park – without having considered the alternatives!
Will you stand for that?
”It’s as green as Kermit the Frog.”
Tell the Mayor & Council:
You’re with the 90% of Chathamites who want to preserve that green lot for the benefit and enjoyment of current and future generations.
It is irresponsible to sacrifice that precious parcel without having carefully considered each of the potential alternative sites.
Residents deserve a chance to weigh in on the alternatives before they make decisions like this one, that will permanently change Chatham Borough
Use the north entrance. Take the elevator to the upper level.
Arrive when convenient. Stay only as long as you please.
Speaking is optional.
What the heck is the above all about?
Last spring, residents flatly rejected a Master Plan amendment, hastily developed behind closed doors, which included needlessly sacrificing the green parcel at 58 North Passaic to help satisfy the Borough’s new affordable housing quota.
Residents urged the Council to consider alternatives that could satisfy that quota, while also preserving that green land for current and future generations.
On June 18th, the Planning Board rubber stamped the take-it-or-leave-it plan. Though the Borough’s experts noted that the Council could later nominate alternative sites, some Council members insisted that the plan was a done deal.
But then two informal Facebook polls revealed that more than 90% of Chathamites want that wooded, Borough-owned parcel preserved for the benefit of current and future generations.
Screenshot
And now a growing chorus of residents is stepping forward to implore the Council to come up with alternatives that could preserve that precious public land. Several attended the September 8th Council meeting.
The looming threat to 58 North Passaic Avenue has become an issue in the current race for Borough Council.
Incumbent Council Member Karen Koronkiewicz (who co-designed the plan) suggested that the Borough might be able to build four apartments on the small lot at 58 North Passaic without chopping down most or all of the trees there.
”If you’re going to build four apartments,” scoffed challenger Joe Barrette, “you have to cut the trees down.”
He’s right about that, as the below aerial views of 58 North Passaic demonstrate. The first shows the site, almost covered what trees, and the second, which shows what the Council aims to build there, states that it will preserve ONE such tree.
Screenshot
At the September 10th debate, first time candidate Miles Gilmore, a member of the Shade Tree Commission, professed little understanding of the housing issue. He proved it by speaking eloquently in favor of protecting the trees at 58 North Passaic, while advocating acquiescence to the Council’s current plan, which will make it necessary to chop down virtually all of them.
Let’s hope Mr. Gilmore will look into the housing plan, and realize that the only way to preserve those trees is to preserve 58 North Passaic and put the new apartments elsewhere in the Borough.
