But WHAT “Redevelopment Contract” are they talking about?
Are they looking to renegotiate the Borough’s longstanding deal with the Ivy? Or the 15-unit project they agreed to build at Post Office Plaza back in 2022?
On Monday night, the Chatham Borough Council unanimously deemed “excessive” and “unrealistic” the 181-unit affordable housing obligation the State has assigned to the Borough, but then the Council unanimously resolved to accept that number anyway. https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=332 Minute 1:33:44
Also on Monday night, the Mayor was vague about the funds available to fulfill the Borough’s obligation to build a 15-unit, 100% affordable apartment house at Post Office Plaza, when in reality the numbers were readily available, showing that Borough taxpayers must pay more than $1 million to build the project.
To fill that quota with inclusionary rental housing, Chatham Borough would be forced to make space for more than 1,200 additional families, putting at least 2,000 additional cars on our busy streets.
Why haven’t the Mayor & Council demanded an adjustment for the lack of vacant land in the Borough?
If they go ahead and accept the number, will they have another opportunity to demand an adjustment?
When will they make that demand? What are the chances they’’ll get it?
Jocelyn Mathiasen is running for a third term on the Borough Council, trying to position herself as a mainstream opponent of overdevelopment, just as she did In 2018, when she first ran for Council using the slogan “Keep Chatham Chatham.”
Ms Mathiasen’s anti-overdevelopment posture is totally inconsistent with her six-year tenure on the Council.
During that time, she has never opposed, or even failed to promote and vote for, any step toward every overdevelopment scheme that has ever come along, including at Post Office Plaza and River Road.
While you were relaxing on LBI, our walkable little Borough was changing into to a less attractive place, with motor bikes on crowded sidewalks and higher property taxesfor all.
“Higher taxes?” you may wonder. “How could the Council raise our taxes in the middle of the summer? Did they do that to pay for the new fire trucks we so desperately need?”
Nope. The. Council used a taxpayer asset to make an outright gift, depriving Borough taxpayers of an automatic tax break, and the chance to choose to use those funds for some urgent municipal need, like new fire trucks.
It was not consensual. How did that happen? Here’s how:
Given certain caps on local taxes and spending, the Borough Council’s annual budget is only about $17 million. All other things being equal, a new, taxable development automatically triggers a little more revenue to the Borough, along with lower property taxes for all of us, unless residents vote to spend more instead.
But the Council can take away our right to that tax break, and free up far more spending money for itself, far above the normal limits, simply by designating the new development exempt from property taxes, and allowing the developer to pay smaller, negotiated amounts known as PILOTs.
PILOT payments aren’t subject to the normal spending limits, and the Borough Council isn’t required to share the PILOT money with residents in the form of lower taxes. The Council doesn’t even need to ask voters before spending the PILOT money.
WIth a PILOT, the Council can simply plunge ahead and spend 95% of the revenue however the Council members please. They can spend it on urgent necessities like fire trucks. They can spend it on luxurious pet projects like the Stanley church. They can even spend all the PILOT money on outright gifts, and still go right on increasing the Borough budget and raising our taxes every year.
That’s exactly what the Council did at its August 12 meeting. The Council voted to give part of the Ivy PILOT payments to the Joint School District of the Chathams, a separate entity with its own $90 million budget and its own sources of funds, to cover expenses that would otherwise be shared with Chatham Township. That’s a gift.
That gift would be acceptable if the Borough Council had made it with the informed consent of Borough residents, for instance if residents had voted for it. But in this case, the Council approved the gift on the spot, the same night the public learned about it.
Why would the Council make such a gift when the Borough is in desperate need of at least two fire trucks, according to the experts the Council paid $18 thousand to evaluate the situation? Ask the Council members.
In fact, the effect of that gift is to raise the school tax burden on the Borough, because it’s on top of the Borough’s fair share of the cost of running the schools as determined by a longstanding formula.
Isn’t the Township also kicking in more money to the School District? No.
Most of the members of the Township Committee are too smart to throw away assets as the Borough Council has, done, if only for fear of getting voted out of office. Instead of giving more than its fair share to the School District, the Township Committee is buying TWO new fire trucks right away, to save money.
You’ve heard what the politicians always like to say:
To get any control over what gets built at River Road, we need a redevelopment plan, they insist.
Unless we have a redevelopment plan, the developers can build whatever they want, they wail, evoking the specter of towering , tacky, monstrosities.
But is that true? No.
Absent a redevelopment plan, any new, private development is subject to many federal, state, and local requirements, including plenty of Borough building, affordable housing, and zoning regulations that apply all over town, and some that apply to the Gateway Overlay Districts of River Road in particular.
For a new, private project at River Road, those requirements include the following detailed rules that set strict standards for almost every aspect of a development:
Keep that in mind next time someone tries to tell you that – unless we adopt a redevelopment plan – the developer “can build whatever he wants” or that adopting another plan is “the only way to control what happens at River Road.”
“It was not a sham vote,” insisted Chatham Mayor Carolyn Dempsey at the July 8th Council meeting.
That was the Mayor’s reaction to proof that the Council had voted on a property tax proposal one week after a Borough lawyer notified the Tax Board that the Council had decided not to pursue that proposal.https://chathamchoice.org/2024/07/who-did-this/
Curious how that happened? Want to support your Mayor & Council? Just like to be in-the-know?
Come to the next Council meeting, which is set for Monday August 12, 7:30 pm, at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue. Use the side door and take the elevator to the upper level.
“It was not a sham vote,” insisted the Mayor, saying she wasn’t aware of the discrepancy until two weeks later, when Bob Weber showed proof at the 7/8 Council meeting.
Now the Mayor needs to find out who made that call behind her back and let us residents know.
UPDATE: Does the employee’s explanation make any sense at all?
There are many different ways to meet state mandated affordable housing obligations, but unless the Mayor & Council get a jump on the deadlines, their options will be severely limited.
That’s why the Mayor has scheduled a public workshop for June 27: to let the public have its say before unveiling her plans.
Are the Mayor & Counciltaking the steps necessary to get a good result for the Borough?
Ask them!
Are you are investigating lower-density, environmentally superior options, like converting existing market rate apartments to affordable ones?
If not, why not? What are you waiting for?
Are you unaware that waiting means forfeiting options?
Are you unaware that if you procrastinate too long, we’ll be forced to accept more huge projects like the Ivy – or even bigger.
If you’re resigned to accepting more big projects, what are you doing to make sure we get a better deal this time?
Here are the deadlines facing the Mayor & Council (additions and corrections welcome):
03/31/24 – Deadline for the developer BNE to file the Periodic Report on Total Project Costs, due within 90 days of Substantial Completion under the terms of the December 2023 financial (PILOT) agreement for the Ivy at River Road
05/01/24 – Deadline for the Borough to bill the developer of the Ivy apartment project on River Road for the second quarterly payment of the annual property tax substitute known as a Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), which was unpaid as of 06/10/2024
06/18/24 – Deadline for the Borough to report non-residential fees collected for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
06/30/24 – Deadline for the Borough to submit to the Morris County Superior Court and Fair Share Housing Center a quarterly report on the progress of the 15-unit, 100% affordable project to be built on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza
08/01/24 – Deadline for the Borough to bill the developer of the Ivy apartment project on River Road for the third quarterly payment of the annual property tax substitute known as a Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), which has gone unpaid as of 06/10/2024
09/16/24 – Deadline for the Borough to report residential fees collected for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
09/30/24 – Deadline for the Borough to submit to the Superior Court and Fair Share Housing Center a quarterly report on the progress of the 15-unit, 100% affordable project to be built on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza
10/20/24 – Deadline for the state to announce the Borough’s affordable housing quota for Fourth Round 2025-2035
11/01/24 – Deadline for the Borough to bill the developer of the Ivy apartment project on River Road for the quarterly payment of the annual property tax substitute known as a Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), which had gone unpaid as of 06/10/2024
12/31/24 – Deadline for the Borough to submit to the Superior Court and Fair Share Housing Center a quarterly report on the progress of the 15-unit, 100% affordable project to be built on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza
01/31/25 – Deadline for the Borough to adopt a resolution accepting an affordable housing quota for Fourth Round 2025-2035
02/28/25 – Deadline for “interested parties” to challenge the Borough’s Fourth Round 2025-2035 affordable housing quota in a new dispute resolution program
03/31/25 – Deadline for the IVY developer BNE to submit the Auditor’s Report to the Borough and DCA
03/31/25 – Deadline for the Borough to begin construction of the 15-unit, 100% affordable apartment project on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza.
03/31/25 – Deadline for the Borough to submit to the Superior Court and Fair Share Housing Center a quarterly report on the progress of the 15-unit, 100% affordable project to be built on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza
06/30/25 – Deadline for the Borough to file its Housing Element & Fair Share Plan, including a new showing that it’s consistent with state policy on development and redevelopment
08/31/25 – Deadline for challenges to the Borough’s Housing Element
12/31/25 – Deadline for the Borough to settle challenges to its Housing Element or explain why it won’t make the changes requested
03/15/26 – Deadline for the Borough to adopt any and all the ordinances, rezoning, and redevelopment areas required by the Housing Element
03/31/26 – Deadline for the Borough to get a Certificate of Occupancy on the 15-unit, 100% affordable project on Bowers Lane in Post Office Plaza
09/26/26 – Expiration of the Borough Third Round immunity from builders’ remedy lawsuits and exclusionary zoning challenges
