The topics discussed in this 2-part article are of critical importance to Teaneck residents. Teaneck Voices will continue to run articles on these topics – AINRs, PILOTs, and WORKSHOP MEETINGS for the 2 more issues until the next Council meeting on Tuesday, September 5, 2023 when the Council will vote on an Ordinance that will give/not give developer, Jonathan Vogel, a 30-year PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) for the apartment building at 189 The Plaza.
Teaneck Voices will run some Letters to the Editor and Comments on these 3 topics. Please send letters and comments to teaneckvoices@gmail.com.
PART I --
Starting in 2006: They said Teaneck needed revenues. They said we do not have a large commercial base in Teaneck and that’s why our property taxes were so high. They said we had to build tall, multifamily buildings, many-story parking garages, hotels, storage facilities and billboards in available places to bring in revenues.
Available places meant the abandoned Verizon building at 1500 Teaneck Road, the space at 1475 Palisade Ave. cheek by jowl with the CSX railroad, the old Holuba Soap Factory behind Herrick Park, 100 State Street, The World of Wings museum, The Marriott Employee Parking lot at Glenpointe, and others. But at least all these were done following the normal zoning and land use board procedures. Council went looking for a way to avoid such troublesome development rules.
Following a 9/6/2018 off-site Council retreat where Council learned about how redevelopment could free up the process, Council proposed and did at its 10/10/2018 meeting introduce an ordinance (25-2018 Click Here) that would have named the Council itself as the a new Teaneck redevelopment entity. But the public in G&W had responded very badly to that idea (Click Here) and Council itself became conflicted (Click Here). Believe it or not, neither that ordinance nor any similar one, has ever appeared on a Council agenda again.
But advised by Teaneck Planning Consultant Phillips Preiss LLC Council within the next month moved quietly to implement precisely what the 10/18 public opposition had forced it to drop.
It simply decided to act on what it could not agree to pass as an ordinance: “We, as the Town’s elected governing board can without ANY formal action simply begin to act as the Town’s authority to control redevelopment and as such Council can designate ANY area of Teaneck an Area In Need of Redevelopment (AINR) by having it examined to be ‘blighted” and getting the Planning Board to agree.’”
a blighted area is defined as an area with buildings or improvements which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, are detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community.
“And then the Council, can do whatever it wants with it – no need to follow existing zoning, no requirements, provide no basis for complaints. We can meet in closed sessions with any developer we want. And even better, once Council has defined an AINR, it can entice developers with lots located in the AINR by offering something called a Payment In Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) so for a reduced fee they are freed from paying the taxes that would normally be owed on property owned by a Teaneck resident. And guess what guys, we can give developers an even bigger incentive by extending that PILOT for 30 years!!"
And that is precisely what Council – beginning in November 2018 and continuing through 2022 – has done in the naming of 9 separate AINRs (some single lots but more recently large tracts of Township properties) and approving PILOTs once a lot has an approved redevelopment plan.
Huh????????
SO -- Teaneck residents were told they need tall, crowded, dense multifamily development to bring in tax revenues because our property taxes are so high.
BUT -- Teaneck Council is building tall, crowded, dense, multifamily development AND then giving away the tax revenues these developments normally would bring in. That is precisely the meaning of PILOTs
SO – Teaneck residents get dense, high-rise development AND the eventual need to assess higher taxes to service the added residents that those tax-protected PILOT projects bring in?
What’s going on here? And more importantly, who benefits?
Teaneck Voices is making no assumptions or accusations about who is benefitting from the PILOTs given and proposed. But there has to be a reason why the Teaneck Council which boasted for years how savings for the taxpayers was its major concern, is suddenly using a mechanism to “entice” developers at the expense of the existing and future taxpayer residents:
· Residents of Teaneck have no idea WHY developers for the two massive building on Decatur Ave have been given a 30-year PILOT.
o And neither does Council! Voices, through OPRA’s, can prove that no one – Council or the administration – ever reviewed the numbers the developer’s consultant provided to calculate either of these PILOTs. They each are giant giveaways.
· At the last Council meeting on August 8, 2023 Council unanimously voted to introduce Ordinance 33-2023 giving developer Jonathan Vogel a 30-year PILOT for an AINR 6-story apartment building at 189 The Plaza. The second reading of the Ordinance and the promised unanimous passing of it is scheduled for the next Council meeting on September 5.
A unanimous vote by the present “new” Council includes the votes of the 3 elected RISE candidates who were chosen on a platform that promised no more AINRS. Are they ignoring their promises? (Click Here to review the electoral forum where all 2022 Council candidates discussed AINRs).
Aat the 8/8 meeting:
· Deputy Mayor Gee explained that there were people without housing so therefore we should encourage the development of buildings like 189. The 2 examples she gave of families in need of housing cannot afford the rent in the AINR buildings (or for that matter in the other apartment buildings built in the last 2-3 years like One 500 Teaneck Road or 1475 Palisade Ave). The public deserves to know what she means when she says there are people who desperately need low or moderate cost housing so we should continue to build “luxury” housing even though these at-risk people you cite cannot benefit from it. Madame Deputy Mayor, you said it brings “balance.” Balance? Please explain.
· The RISE Councilmembers were joined by Mayor Michael Pagan who made an uninterpretable statement to which a link was provided in last week’s Teaneck Voices. In his statement he said that he would vote for this 189 The Plaza PILOT ordinance but after this he would support no more AINRs. Mr. Mayor, why are you supporting this one?
PART II.
It is evident that all the important decisions referred to in Part I of this article were made out of the public’s hearing!
· Why use AINRs?
· Why are perfectly attractive, comfortable areas “blighted?”
· Why give PILOTs?
And then we ask:
· Why – new Council - are you breaking campaign policy commitments?
· Why will the Mayor’s vote “yes” on 189 but he knows that he will vote for no others?
The public deserves to know.
How can that be accomplished? WORKSHOP MEETINGS! The Council will respond immediately that they have Work Session Items on every council agenda and those are supposed to be the equivalent of Workshop Meetings.
Look at a sample under the Council’s ordinance-defined Work Sessions:
· Miscellaneous
· Old Business
· New Business
· Communications
· Committee Reports by Council Liaisons
· Council-listed Items
· Township Manager’s Report
· Township Attorney’s report
Then look at the council agenda of almost any other NJ municipality. Those items are part of the regular governing board meetings.
Workshop Sessions are not about ITEMS. Almost any item can be discussed at a workshop. Workshop Meetings are about a PROCESS. The process is the open discussion of items of importance to the public. In the past they included councilmembers sitting around a table set on the floor of the council chambers in front of the dais. With only a brief G&W, These meetings are not a time for the Council to hear from the public, but for the public to hear from the councilmembers as they talk to and debate with one another.
For example, apropos of this article, at a Workshop Meeting the councilmembers might have discussed Developer Vogel’s request for a 30-year PILOT. They might have collaboratively, in public, reviewed his financial statements to see whether or not he was requesting the PILOT because he financially could not afford to build otherwise. Do all the numbers add up to creating a benefit to the Town from a project on this lot – or only for the developer? Important issue for us to know.
Both Mayor Pagan and Deputy Mayor Gee could have shared their hesitancies with their council colleagues and the public, so we all could understand why they planned to vote yes on something much of the public was against as demonstrated repeatedly this Spring and Summer.
WITHOUT REAL WORKSHOP MEETINGS THE PUBLIC REMAINS IN THE DARK AND THE PROMISED TRANSPARENCY – OPENNESS OF INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC – REMAINS AN UNFULFILLED CAMPAIGN PROMISE.
Teaneck Voices welcomes your Letters and Comments: teaneckvoices@gmail.com
|