Three must recuse selves from Stop & Shop hearing
Land ownership raises questions of conflict
BY JAY BODAS Correspondent
Aconflict of interest. This was the reason given at the Nov. 19 Metuchen Borough Council meeting as to why three members of the borough government who also sit on the Planning Board have voluntarily recused themselves from hearing a Planning Board application on how to redevelop the former Stop & Shop on Lake and Central avenues.

"Since the last meeting, I was notified by the Planning Board attorney that the borough - and that includes myself, the council liaison, and the Class II member of the Planning Board - has been conflicted out of any participation in the so-called Stop & Shop development," said Mayor Edmund O'Brien at last week's Borough Council meeting.

In addition to O'Brien, the other two members of the Planning Board who have recused themselves are Borough Councilwoman Catherine Totin and Borough Administrator William Boerth.

"The reason for this is that there is a court case on the books from a neighboring community that has to do with the sale of land in a development that puts the borough and members of the Planning Board who are representing the borough into conflict," O'Brien said.

At the meeting, Borough Attorney David Frizell said that the situation was "unfortunate" but that it was better to "play it safe."

"There is a case in place that says if the borough owns a tiny sliver of property in a large development, then those administration officials, including Boerth, yourself, and council President Totin, who sits on the Planning

Board, will not be able to vote in that case," Frizell said. "We don't want it to go through the Planning Board process and then find it is potentially tainted."

"It is better to recuse yourselves from Planning Board deliberations and let it go forth with alternates or whoever can discuss it," he said.

After the council meeting, O'Brien said the borough government owns a "small sliver of land" next to Boro Hardware that is "appraised at $75,000."

"It is the Planning Board attorney's opinion, that is concurred by David Frizell, that this creates a conflict because we are also representing the borough in that application, and the borough stands to gain by it," he said after the meeting. "That is the reason why the conflict was brought to our attention."

This is the second time members of the borough government have been conflicted out of hearing a Planning Board case, according to O'Brien.

"The first time was a case heard in October of last year, I believe, and involved a cell tower in which we were getting lease money from Verizon," O'Brien said after the meeting.