Has longtime Borough Council Member Jocelyn Mathiasen finally come around?
Might she heed the growing chorus of residents requesting a public forum to consider alternatives before the Council hires someone to chop down the trees and pave up to 80% of one of the last few green spots in the Borough, right next to Memorial Park?
To the surprise of nobody, Ms Mathiasen still refuses to reconsider needlessly sacrificing the unique, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue.
What’s amazing is that a powerful elected official would stoop to trying to justify not holding that public forum by making baseless personal attacks on private citizens who have requested such a forum.
Just look at what Ms Mathiasen said at the most recent public Council meeting, held Tuesday October 13, 2026. https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=561
At that meeting, Ms Mathiasen falsely accused unspecified residents of misbehaving at a previous meeting, where she had invited an expert to explain PILOT agreements at the request of “some of the same people here.” (2:37:59) https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=298
“[A]t that forum, there was booing, hissing, interrupting,” said Ms Mathiasen. “There were insults, insults at, towards the expert…. the behavior was so appalling.”
But is that true? We haven’t found such behavior in the video of that October 15, 2024 meeting, shown here: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=298 (Please let us know if you find any.)
(Was Ms Mathiasen appalled that a Borough lawyer interrupted a public speaker who was explaining that PILOTs are actually stealth taxes? See 4:45:40)
More to the point, are the professional experts we taxpayers pay to advise and represent the Borough in tough situations actually so delicate that they require Ms Mathiasen’s tender protection from cross words and eye rolling?
As if those strange claims weren’t bad enough, at the recent October 13, 2026 Council meeting, Ms Mathiasen also stooped to making false and personally defamatory comments about a certain longtime Borough resident and volunteer who was not present. (2:37:10)
Ms Mathiasen falsely accused that resident of posting things “…on the Chatham Choice website… that are simply not true… also things that are absolutely untrue.”
What, for instance? Ms Mathiasen did not cite an example. Not one.
She claimed she had “…spent a lot of time identifying statements that are not true…”
Such as what? Ms Mathiasen did not cite an example. Not one.
She claimed, “…it’s just not based on honesty…. there’s a lot of dishonesty floating around…
An example? Ms Mathiasen did not cite an example. Not one.
At the same October 13, 2026 meeting (2:37:10), Ms Mathiasen also insisted she stands by an op-ed she published in the Patch last March 2026, yet she didn’t explain why it had been taken down. And she didn’t refute any part of the point-by-point debunking shown here: https://chathamchoice.org/2026/03/just-the-facts/
Why would a third-term Council member like Mathiasen stoop so low?
Perhaps she stooped to lies and defamation because she couldn’t defend the remarks she had made at the previous Council meeting, on September 28, 2026. (https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=557 at 2:35:44), unwittingly demonstrating the need for the public forum she refuses to consider:
1. At that September 28, 2026 meeting, Ms Mathiasen had blamed the state of New Jersey for her handling of the Borough’s affordable housing plan, claiming, quote: ”…towns… were given a very short timeframe to come up with a complete affordable housing plan…”
FACT: That timeframe is irrelevant to our ongoing request that the Council hold a public forum as soon as practicable AFTER receiving the final Certificate of Compliance, an option described by the Borough’s affordable housing lawyer at the December 8, 2025 Council meeting.
(She won’t even reveal if the Certificate is final now and, if not, when it will be final.)
2. Ms Mathiasen also tried to pass off a short list of properties as due diligence.
FACT: As she knows, that list is not complete. It totally excludes most privately owned parcels.
3. Ms Mathiasen insisted, quote, “…there was no way… that we could come up with an agreement with any private property owner… [before June 30, 2025]”
FACT: That’s no excuse not to seek alternatives AFTER the court grants the final Certificate, as our experts described at the June and December 2025 Borough meetings.
4. Ms Mathiasen told us, quote, “We subsequently learned that once …you’ve gotten a judgment from the court, that if you reopen the plan, you can reopen your entire plan….” She added, quote, “And that was said at a Planning Board meeting…”
FACT: Which Planning Board meeting? Ms Mathiasen has not responded to an email asking that. And, if true, why didn’t the expert lawyer or planner warn about that at the June 18 or December 8 meeting?
We heard nothing like that until the planner spoke at the March 9, 2026 Council meeting, nearly a month after the judge approved the settlement.
What changed between December 8 and March 9 that the Borough’s housing attorney couldn’t handle?
Why not have the Borough’s expert affordable housing lawyer explain at a public forum?
5. Ms Mathiasen told us, quote, “… the only other lot that could potentially be used is… a much worse candidate…”
FACT: Even if true of Borough-owned properties, it is not true of the privately-owned sites that routinely go up for sale.
6. She cited the cost of a substitute lot, saying, quote, “…the number one thing we hear about is taxes.”
FACT: Sure, nobody wants to pay higher taxes. Yet they sometimes decide a certain benefit is worth the cost. A public forum would reveal if residents would rather save $50 to $100 per year or preserve the green lot next to Memorial Park.
7. Ms Mathiasen insisted using another site, quote, “… is just not feasible…” as “… we’re supposed to break ground within two years….”
FACT: Only extra step is buying the lot. If that would blow the two-year deadline, she should have the lawyer come to a public forum and tell us why.
8. Finally, Ms Mathiasen cited her op-ed on the subject. You can see it and the point-by-point rebuttal in a March 2026 post on ChathamChoice.org (https://chathamchoice.org/2026/03/just-the-facts/)
