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:
In fact, that AJDM proposal PREDATES the Redevelopment Plan. When the Council first unveiled that Plan, on April 14, 2026 https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=488the Planning Board ALREADY HAD details of the proposal, as you can see in the following letters, dated March 6 and 27, 2026:
What that means is that as of April 14, 2026, when the Mayor & Council presented their Redevelopment Plan to the public, they already knew what the developer was prepared to build without the benefit of such a plan or a PILOT tax exemption.So, contrary to the official explanation, the developer’s proposal cannot be the reason the Mayor & Council chose to reject the Plan at the June 22 meeting.
One thing we do know is that vote was risky. It triggered consequence under an agreement the Council had approved last December 8, 2025:
Screenshot
What does that mean for Chatham? How was it risky for the Council to vote NOT to adopt the Plan for River Road?
“If the Borough does not adopt a plan by July 1, Fair Share Housing Center has the right to re-open this issue to ask for the existing affordable housing overlay zones to even higher density in that area. Fair Share Housing Center may also request changes to the adopted plan if they do not believe that the plan will lead to a successful project.” (p. 5)
Will Fair Share – or anyone else – seize that opportunity to demand greater density on River Road or reopen the Council’s Fourth Round plan?
Meanwhile, after months of legal wrangling behind the scenes, at the June 22nd meeting the Council also voted to consent to a court order the public couldn’t see until it was filed with the court the following day.
What does that order mean for Chatham? Why did the Council authorize the affordable housing lawyer to sign it after fighting over the terms of that order for months?
For clues, check out the letter the Borough lawyer had filed with the court on May 14, 2026:
In that video, the Mayor & Council sit on the raised dais, poker-faced and apparently oblivious to the Snailster’s antics until a longtime Borough resident calls and brings it to their attention.
“There is a puppet snail in the background…” observes the caller. “It’s quite distracting…When I’m looking at a speaker, all I see is the snail puppet… Are you aware of that?” (1:59:36)
“No, I have no idea what you’re talking about, ” replies Mayor Dempsey.
So the caller specifies the location of the stuffed snail. Council members perk up and peer at the podium. Smiles cross their faces. A giggle sweeps the Chambers.
“Do you see that?” asks the caller.
“We’re all good. Keep going,” says the Mayor, neither confirming nor denying having seen the Snailster’s stellar performance. And no wonder.
In effect, the clever snail danced circles around our Mayor & Council’s new policy requiring walk-on participants to give their names and full home addresses on live television and Zoom.
Of course, our Mayor & Council don’t give their own home addresses at public meetings. They don’t even disclose them in state filings almost nobody ever sees. Too risky for them.
Perhaps once upon a time requiring such personal disclosures at Council meetings created no barrier to public participation, Today, it does. Those meetings run live on cable tv and Zoom, and in reports and videos permanently posted online, making each speaker’s name, address, voice, words, and moving image readily available to everyone all over the world forever.
Requiring such personal details undermines the purpose of Public Comment by making it impossible for residents to participate in local government without advertising in real time that they are not at home. That and other resulting risks discourage participation by residents who live alone or with vulnerable family members, lack security systems or personal protection devices, or simply like to maintain a little privacy.
Solution? The Mayor & Council could easily gather any necessary personal information off-camera, as does the Board of Education.
Only thing is, that might lead to more public participation at meetings.
The next two Council meetings are on Tuesday May 26 and Monday, June 8, 2026, at 7:30 pm at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue.
Rest assured that you won’t need to sign in or out. There’s no dress code. Come as you are. Arrive at your convenience, sit wherever you like, leave whenever you please.
You know our Mayor & Council often turn a deaf ear to the residents who elected them.
Sometimes they have to listen to you. Now for instance.
With a strong candidate like David Andeasen challenging the Party machine in the June 2nd primary, our Mayor & Council cannot ignore your views on the two big issues facing them:
To meet a July 1 deadline, the Council needs to vet a new Redevelopment Plan for River Road by its June 8th meeting. The proposed Plan would allow up to 720 MORE apartments on River Road, at least 64% more than allowed under current zoning. https://chathamchoice.org/2026/04/another-project-on-river-road/
Only after that is resolved will the court issue a Certificate of Compliance. As such, the Mayor & Council have plenty of time to hold a public forum to explain their plan to develop the green, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic, next to Memorial Park, versus buying an alternative site, before hiring a contractor to pave over 80% of that green gem. https://chathamchoice.org/2026/03/just-the-facts/
Wondering why the Council hasn’t already laid out the facts about its plan for 58 North Passaic Avenue – at least the construction costs?
Why would the Mayor & Council even consider allowing 720 new apartments on River Road when it’s already flooded with cars?
Wouldn’t a Redeveloper inevitably get a PILOT property tax break at the expense of the rest of us?
attend public Council meetings on Monday, May 11 and Tuesday May 26, 2026, 7:30 pm, at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue, upper level. (Speaking is optional.)
