Have you seen your latest Chatham Borough tax bill?
Then you’ve also seen the letter Mayor Dempsey enclosed, full of rumors and myths about the Borough’s plan to pave over the wooded, taxpayer-owned parcel at 58 North Passaic Avenue.
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 Brough taxpayers?
- What are the alternatives?
- What are the pros and cons?
For those who prefer facts:
MYTH: Environmentalists are demanding that the Mayor & Council preserve the tree canopy at 58 North Passaic Avenue.
REALITY: Residents are asking the Mayor & Council to put off paving that site until after a public forum, where people can get basic facts, ask informed questions, and get answers.
MYTH: 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 about that project, such as estimated costs and alternatives rejected. Without such facts, nobody can intelligently discuss options
MYTH: There are no options to discuss. The Borough must develop 58 North Passaic Avenue to satisfy the state’s affordable housing quota.
REALITY: The state did not target 58 North Passaic for development. It was chosen by eight Borough insiders. We don’t know why or how, as they met in secret and kept no records.
MYTH: Developing 58 North Passaic would help the Borough meet its affordable housing quota at no cost to taxpayers.
REALITY: 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 would enable the Borough to meet its affordable housing quota without buying land.
REALITY: Not only would taxpayers be on the hook for the cost of the project at 58 North Passaic, that project would also mean the permanent loss of recreation space, trees, fresh air, natural habitats for birds, bees, bats, and the option to lease, sell, or use that land for the benefit of all.
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 at ANY location in the Borough. And the Council has many other alternatives.
MYTH: It is too late to consider alternatives to developing 58 North Passaic Avenue.
REALITY: In fact, it is too early to consider an alternative. The Borough cannot propose one until after receiving its Certificate of Compliance.
MYTH: It would be too expensive for taxpayers to buy a privately-owned lot as an alternative site.
REALITY: How expensive? With an irreplaceable taxpayer asset at stake, taxpayers are entitled to know what it would cost them to preserve it. Yet the Mayor & Council refuse to estimate the effect on property taxes, simply insisting the cost is too high.
MYTH: Even proposing an alternative to developing 58 North Passaic Avenue would put the Borough at great risk of lawsuits and other legal jeopardy.
REALITY: If it were risky to propose an alternative, the Borough’s experts would have warned about that when they talked at a Planning Board hearing on June 18, 2025 and at a Council meeting on December 8, 2025.
They did not mention such a risk. On those occasions, the affordable housing lawyer and planner warned only that such a proposal must wait until after the Borough receives its Certificate of Compliance.
If, as the Mayor claims, it would be risky to propose any alternative, why not have the Borough’s affordable housing lawyer and planner say so at a public forum, now that a local has offered to pay the hourly fees?
