Tag Archives: local redevelopment

Things fall apart

Redevelopment, River Road, Uncategorized, , , , , , ,

Last November 11, our Borough Council commissioned a draft Redevelopment Plan for a massive, 500-unit apartment project on River Road, next to the huge, 245-unit Ivy complex.

https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/2972429/RESOLUTION__24-333_AUTHORIZING_DMR_TO_PREPARE__A_DRAFT_REDEVELOPMENT_PLAN.pdf

Since then, it’s come to light that the new project would be risky for Chatham Borough in at least three ways, as follows:

First, this new River Road project is NOT required by affordable housing law, and it will NOT help fulfill the Borough’s new affordable housing RDP quota either. The new apartments allowed under the Plan would be in addition to what’s needed to satisfy that quota.

Go to minute 1:31:00 here: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=197

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/categories/letters-to-the-editor/articles/blind-faith

Second, the supposed risk associated with NOT adopting that 500-apartment Redevelopment Plan for River Road is totally imaginary.

The Council President insists that, absent the new Plan, current zoning would allow private property owners to develop up to 707 new apartments on River Road and the Borough would have NO say in the matter. Scary but not true.

https://patch.com/new-jersey/chatham/borough-supporting-another-massive-development-river-road-nodx?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3WyQLIJjRrA656yOFZhCsqROaE5baV9gYZ9WzT4wwfflvk8LfY5WYe4j0_aem_POd3z1AP3xU68-EadQWMWw

In fact, about 40% of the Redevelopment Area is Borough-owned. Private developers can’t touch it without the Council’s consent.

DRAFT Gateway Analysis – Copy – Copy – Copy 1 – Copy – Copy – Copy 2Download

The part of the Redevelopment area that’s privately-owned is dozens of small lots, all subject to many federal, state, and local rules and regulations.

As such, the owners wouldn’t be able to squeeze in more than a few apartments without first jumping through many hoops, including getting Borough approval to merge lots.

Third, if the Council tries to prevent such private development by adopting a Plan, we’ll actually end up with far more apartments on River Road. That’s because a rental Plan would have to provide for at least 500 new apartments – more than twice the number at the Ivy.

The reason the new Plan would have to be that big is to satisfy the legal requirement that it must provide for at least 75 affordable units, which must be at least 15% of the project.

P. 13 https://legistarweb-production.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/attachment/pdf/1399493/2022-05-27-HEFSP_amendment.finaladopted.pdf

Fifteen percent affordable is also the usual ceiling for developers of rental projects. So to induce a redeveloper to provide the minimum 75 affordable rental units, the Council would have to permit construction of a 500-unit project, compared to the 245-units now at the Ivy.

Fourth, our Mayor & Council are well aware that the Redevelopment Plan would allow construction of 500 apartments. They heard it directly from Borough Planner Fran Reiner last March. Go to minute 1:06:00 here: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=197

But some of them don’t seem to realize that such a Plan would also almost inevitably involve giving the redeveloper a total PILOT exemption from paying property taxes, same as the Ivy.

Fifth, to get the redeveloper to throw in a “free” riverside park and other so-called “amenities,” the Borough Council would have to accept an even worse a deal for residents and taxpayers. They’ll probably give away Borough land, allow the redeveloper to build extra stories, grant the redeveloper an even more lavish PILOT tax exemption.

 https://chathamchoice.org/2024/08/welcome-back/

Before spending any more time or money on another Redevelopment Plan for River Road, our Mayor & Council need to tell us how they would avoid getting stuck with a huge, 500-unit rental project that would clog up our roads, and would almost certainly demand an exemption from property taxes the rest of us must pay.

https://chathamchoice.org/2024/12

Pitiful

Redevelopment, River Road, , , , , , , , ,

Our Mayor & Borough Council are plunging ahead with a Redevelopment Plan for another massive, 500-unit River Road apartment project that:

  • is NOT REQUIRED by affordable housing law; and
  • will NOT COUNT toward meeting the Borough’s RDP affordable housing quota!

Why would they do THAT? They offer two justifications, both flimsy.

  • First, they’ll tell you a Redevelopment Plan is the only way to “control” what gets built on RIver Road: Absent a Plan, they claim, the property owners can do whatever they want. That’s nonsense.

All Chatham property is subject to countless federal, state, and local laws and regulations. A Plan would actually make matters worse by providing for at least 500 rental apartments to satisfy setaside rquirements.

  • Second, they’ll tell you that with a Redevelopment Plan they can make the developer throw in some public goodies – such as a free riverside park. More nonsense.

Nothing is free. Whether or not the Mayor & Council manage to negotiate for any decent public benefits whatsoever, the rest of us will pay dearly in the form of a stealth tax increase triggered by the corporate welfare PILOT tax exemption the developer will demand and get, just as happened at the Ivy project.

The good news is that there’s still time to change all that.

Tell the Mayor & Council to put this project on ice until they’ve done their homework and considered their options.

Or better yet, shelve this massive Redevelopment project. Concentrate on urgent matters, like finding a way to meet the Borough’s affordable housing obligations without overwhelming our roads and schools, depleting our water supply, polluting our environment, or cheating taxpayers.

Context: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/categories/letters-to-the-editor/articles/blind-faith

Stealth tax: https://chathamchoice.org/2024/10/a-slick-infomercial-for-corporate-welfare/

What about our water supply? https://chathamchoice.org/2024/11/water-water-everywhere/

Water, water everywhere?

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , ,

Why isn’t the Council considering the environmental consequences of adding at least another 1,000 additional residents by redeveloping the rest of River Road, starting with a 500+ unit apartment project twice the size of the Ivy?

The effect on our water supply, for instance.

Chatham Borough draws its water from the Buried Valley Aquifer system of the Central Passaic River Basin via three deep wells near the Middle School.

https://www.chathamborough.org/government/forms/public-works/2450-2023-water-quality-report-chatham-water-utility/file https://www.usgs.gov/centers/new-jersey-water-science-center/major-aquifers-new-jersey

Because Chatham’s water supply is finite, the Borough Code restricts its use, even when there’s no drought. https://ecode360.com/6796030

So why did our Council allow the Ivy project on River Road to bring in at least 500 more residents and even put a swimming pool on the roof in the middle of a drought?

https://chathamborough.org/government/news/453-nj-declares-drought-watch

And why is the Council now rushing to build another huge apartment project in the middle of another drought? https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/sections/news-around-new-jersey/articles/drought-warning-declared-in-new-jersey-residents-urged-to-limit-water-use-13

Can our wells satisfy the demands of another 1,000 residents, flushing toilets, showering, bathing, running dishwashers and washing machines? Will the new place also include a swimming pool?

What will happen to Chatham if our wells run dry?

Will the Council consider any of the other potential water consequences of overdevelopment, including runoff, flooding, and pollution of the Passaic River?

Water quality: https://www.chathamborough.org/government/forms/public-works/2448-chatham-swap/file

https://www.nj.gov/dep/watersupply/pdf/violations2023.pdf

Storm water: https://chathamborough.org/government/documents/forms-documents/plans-reports/storm-water-reports/2727-2023-stormwater-pollution-prevention-plan/file

Flooding: https://firststreet.org/city/chatham-nj/3412100_fsid/flood

Water treatment: https://www.rosenet.org/256/Madison-Chatham-Joint-Meeting. https://ecode360.com/6796352

Water pollution: https://www.njwatercheck.com/SystemFinder/433/Detail

Severe drought

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , ,

With water in such short supply, why is the Borough Council looking to build yet another housing project that would increase demands on our wells? https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/categories/letters-to-the-editor/articles/blind-faith

Find out Monday, November 25, 7:30 pm, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue or by Zoom: https://www.chathamborough.org/resident/calendar/mayor-council-meeting-13-1730154600

Here we go again

Uncategorized, , , , ,

Do you love the giant Ivy apartment complex on River Road?

Now our Mayor & Borough Council are hell bent on building yet another massive housing project there – one that’s more than twice the size of the Ivy – and without having considered any alternatives or implications.

This project is NOT necessary. The Borough need not build it to meet its current affordable housing quota and, if built, it Will NOT count toward the Borough’s quota (RDP) for 2025-2035.

On Monday November 11, the Council will vote to direct a Borough planner to start drafting just such a plan. You can see it on their agenda here: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/chathamborough/54501977-9f8c-11ee-a93d-0050569183fa-87c420e4-d6a2-4396-b701-70ff66871099-1731095422.pdf

Not only would this new project be massive, we taxpayers would inevitably wind up having to pay for it by granting the developer a corporate welfare PILOT tax exemption.

Is that what you want? Would you prefer that our Mayor & Council consider some options before committing to this scheme? Do you have any questions? Don’t wait until it’s too late to ask them.

Come to the Borough. Council meeting on Monday, November 11, 7:30 pm at Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue. Use the north entrance. Take the elevator to the upper level. Or attend by Zoom: https://d3n9y02raazwpg.cloudfront.net/chathamborough/54501977-9f8c-11ee-a93d-0050569183fa-87c420e4-d6a2-4396-b701-70ff66871099-1731095422.pdf

Poor response: https://patch.com/new-jersey/chatham/borough-supporting-another-massive-development-river-road-nodx?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR3WyQLIJjRrA656yOFZhCsqROaE5baV9gYZ9WzT4wwfflvk8LfY5WYe4j0_aem_POd3z1AP3xU68-EadQWMWw

Better follow up: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/categories/letters-to-the-editor/articles/blind-faith

Find out Monday, November 28, 7:30 pm, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue or by Zoom: https://www.chathamborough.org/resident/calendar/mayor-council-meeting-13-1730154600

A slick infomercial for corporate welfare

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , ,

Back on September 23, Council President Mathiasen promised to level with residents about the crucial differences between PILOT payments of the kind the Borough gets from the Ivy, and the normal property taxes the rest of us have to pay.

Instead, she used our tax money to hire a slick financial consultant to do an hourlong infomercial for corporate welfare.

That’s the only way to describe her consultant’s presentation at the October 15 Council meeting. He made his best case for continuing to waive property taxes on big, new apartment buildings for decades, so that the Council can get its hands on a cut of the revenues, which they call PILOT payments.

https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=298

Those PILOT payments are actually our money. And it’s a lot of money. With the Ivy, for instance, the consultant says the PILOT payments will average $1.7 million per year for three decades. That’s ten percent of the Borough’s current budget, and 13% of the municipal tax levy. 

Does that PILOT revenue reduce the property tax burden on the rest of us, as a new taxable development would? No. The Council can spend it all and go right on raising taxes every year as usual.

In effect, PILOTs take money out of the pockets of the rest of us, by depriving us of the automatic tax break we’d get if the Ivy paid property taxes.

PILOTs also deprive us residents of the right to vote on how to use those extra public funds. 

Ms Mathiasen’s consultant actually touted PILOTs as a way to use public funds for projects that are politically unpopular. Check it out here:

03:00:17 here: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=298

Huh? Why does the consultant think spending taxpayer funds to thwart the wishes of voters is a good thing? 

Now the Mayor & Council are ready to plunge ahead with a second, luxury redevelopment project on River Road –  one that’s twice the size of the Ivy, with 500 apartments, and will require taxpayers to subsidize it with yet another PILOT tax break.

Demand that before taking another step, the Council first:

  1. Identify the alternatives.
  2. Do its due diligence.
  3. Present a timely, thorough matrix, comparing the costs, benefits, and other implications of that 500-unit PILOT project with other alternatives, including the normal, wait-and-see approach.
  4. Hold a timely, robust public discussion.

“By using PILOT agreements, local governments can essentially raise revenue and finance public services in ways that sidestep the constraints of tax caps or spending limitations.”

– Chat GPT

This just in

Uncategorized, , , , , , , ,

So what is Chatham’s affordable housing quota for 2025-2035?

See p. 33 of the October 18 report: https://nj.gov/dca/dlps/pdf/FourthRoundCalculation_Methodology.pdf

Word is that our planners will adjust the numbers shown in that report to allow for the scarcity of vacant land in Chatham Borough, and then try to persuade the State to accept its adjusted numbers as the quotas.

That analysis will probably be similar to that used in 2022, as shown on page 5 of the current Housing Elements, linked here:

https://www.chathamborough.org/government/documents/meeting-documents/planning-board-meetings/2022-planning-board-meeting-documents/2022-planning-board-agendas/2108-2022-05-16-hefsp-amendment-final4/file

The State says the Borough Council has until the end of this January 2025 to negotiate the final quota, and to adopt a binding resolution accepting it. https://www.njlm.org/civicalerts.aspx?aid=2924

For a list of deadlines facing the Borough Council, click here: https://chathamchoice.org/2024/06/deadlines/

Will the truth come out?

Uncategorized, , , , , , , ,

Now we know that the Mayor & certain members of the Borough Council are aiming to partner with for-profit developers to build 500 MORE rental apartments on River Road, right next to the 245-unit Ivy project that went up last year. https://chathamchoice.org/2024/09/wait-another-big-project-on-river-road/

They claim that in return for the chance to collect big rents on the new complex, the developer will throw in some “free” goodies for the Borough, including a lovely riverside park.

Of course, in reality nothing is free.

To get the riverside park and other “free” goodies, the Council would have to agree to excuse the property taxes on the new project for 30 years.

That means instead of picking up part of the Borough’s ever growing expenses, automatically reducing your tax bill, the developer would pay smaller amounts known as PILOT payments.

Why would Council members even consider that? Because unlike tax money, which is subject to certain limits, the Council could spend the PILOT money on frills, gifts, or whatever else, and go right on raising your property taxes to pay for the “free” riverside park and other goodies.

In other words, you would pay for the “free” goodies for the next 30 years.

Why would the Council take on that long term burden – and put more than a thousand more people and hundreds more cars on River Road forever – when it could pay less for whatever the Borough needs and wants on its own?

Ask the Council’s financial advisor on Tuesday, October 15, 7:30 pm, Borough Hall, 54 Fairmount Avenue. Use the side door. Take the elevator to the upper level. Or Zoom here:

https://www.chathamborough.org/resident/calendar/mayor-council-meeting-13-1728948600?fbclid=IwY2xjawF6FoZleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHasSMW6-NiNkg-3-2lFLZ8wJz2h7iH8Q7GMc8mYRExEilNWeqS9nsLmWlw_aem_KhQbSrxfm87K-GFVKf_Q-w

PS: Is it true that the Council must do this deal or lose any hope of influencing what happens on River Road? No. https://chathamchoice.org/2024/08/myths-about-future-development-at-river-road/

The great spinmeister

Uncategorized, , , , , , ,

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.”

https://patch.com/new-jersey/chatham/post-office-plaza-another-reason-vote-dems-tomorrow

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.

There is no reason to believe she has changed.

While the cat’s away….

Uncategorized, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 taxes for 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.

Won’t that gift help curb our school taxes? Not one bit. The School District is still legally entitled to the same annual increase in its share of our property taxes, which taxpayers had already voted to increase permanently in 2023. https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/articles/vote-no-on-public-question-1-which-will-permanently-raise-property-taxes-for-an-expenditure-already-in-the-school-district-budget

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.

https://chathamchoice.org/2023/06/why-should-chatham-borough-pay-more-than-its-fair-share/

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.

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/chatham/sections/government/articles/chatham-township-committee-votes-to-bond-4-8-million-to-buy-fire-trucks-police-cars-study-for-expanded-police-headquarters

Why didn’t the Council ask us first? Good questions for the Borough Council.

https://chathamchoice.org/2023/06/why-should-chatham-borough-pay-more-than-its-fair-share/

Will Borough voters ever wise up and rein in Council abuse of our PILOT funds? You tell me.

See for yourself at 2:55 here: https://chathamborough.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=263