Council tables redevelopment ordinance - again
Ordinance withdrawn amid new questions and concerns
BY CHRIS GAETANO Staff Writer
The contentious debate over the ordinance that would create an independent redevelopment agency in Edison began with a bang but ultimately ended with a whimper.

The Township Council decided to table the ordinance one more time after spending close to four hours debating the measure during its June 12 meeting.

The decision to hold off voting on the ordinance had the support of everyone on the council with the exception of Councilman Dr. Sudhanshu Prasad.

If eventually approved, the ordinance would create a sevenperson redevelopment agency that would exclusively focus on redevelopment matters in the township. To do so, it would execute redevelopment plans developed by the township and would be able to utilize a broad array of powers to do so, such as acquire property through eminent domain, issue bonds and extend credit.

Supporters say that a dedicated agency would professionalize the redevelopment process and free up township officials to attend to other duties requiring their attention. Opponents have expressed concern over the broad powers the agency would wield and feel it could be abused as a way for the township to pass the buck on unpopular decisions.

When the council meeting began, the chambers were already flooded with people, many of whom had attended the rally against the measure just a half-hour before. When the ordinance was opened for public comment, the flood of concerns and reservations regarding the potential agency comprised the bulk of the marathon four-hour-long discussion on the matter, with comments focusing on a wide variety of issues.

Many were concerned with the costs that would be associated with the organization, with former Councilman Robert Karabinchak noting that the startup costs alone would amount to about $165,000, not including the expenses associated with hiring professionals to staff the agency.

Esther Nenitz, a local resident and meeting regular, noted that such entities in other towns have tended to require vast numbers of people to oversee various projects and wondered how the township would be able to bear these costs.

"When you look at something like [New Brunswick's] DevCo, they have a staff, and the consequence of them having a staff is that they have grown into a very large organization … it takes a lot of money to run one of these things," said Nenitz.

She added that the developer should have to pay for the agency, but also said this, too, is problematic because this brings up issues of conflict of interest.

"If the developers pay to have this done, they will want something in return."

"Why do we need a redevelopment agency at this stage of the game, when we are overdeveloped as it is?" asked resident Richard Sweeny.

Councilwoman AnnMarie Griffin- Ussak said that it would allow the council to devote more attention to other matters and said that a board full of professionals more knowledgeable than the council members would be a welcome change in the township.

"It is my understanding that a redevelopment authority would not overdevelop this town … it would assist us in reasonable development. … As a council, we have many, many things to consider. A redevelopment agency would help us focus and determine, and not to overdevelop," said Griffin-Ussak.

Many comments also focused on concerns over just how much power the redevelopment agency would wield. A redevelopment attorney who has done work with the township in the past, Joseph Baumann, tried to assure people that power would ultimately rest in the hands of the council, and that the powers and abilities afford to the organization would be granted on a case-by-case basis.

During the meeting, Baumann said that in his professional opinion, the redevelopment agency would only be able to acquire land through eminent domain if the redevelopment plan approved by the township called for it. Further, in a correspondence from Baumann to the mayor and council, he wrote that it would only be able to bond if it either secured third-party funding for paying it off or obtained the explicit permission of the council to do so.

This did not reassure residents, however, who noted that the mayor's supporters hold the majority on the council, and so whether by its own power or through friendly council members, they felt that the checks and balances on the entity were sorely lacking. At the very least, some said that the explicit powers of the redevelopment agency need to be laid out in the ordinance, which they said was too vague in its current incarnation.

"Either way you look at it, the man who started it [Choi] gets his wish, 4 to 3. … Ever since the last election, it ain't going for the people anymore. It's going away from the people," said Walt Shneer, an Edison resident.

Baumann noted that redevelopment can run amok whether or not there is an actual agency, noting that Long Branch's current difficulties with eminent domain have to do with the local government.

Resident Lois Wolke, however, felt that the redevelopment agency would make it more difficult to hold the government accountable in the event that it did run amok.

"If anything's going to run amok, I wish it would be the council, because then I can vote them out. With an agency, I have no power," said Wolke.

Some residents even brought Baumann's credibility into the discussion, openly stating suspicions that the attorney was simply trying to generate work for himself.

Along the same track, Karabinchak questioned land holdings that he said Prasad revealed through his financial disclosure form that he filled out when first taking office, owned throughout town, many of which, Karabinchak said, were in or near areas of redevelopment. He wondered whether this represented a conflict of interest, saying that the councilman could end up benefiting.

Baumann, though, said that the creation of the agency in and of itselfwould not represent a conflict of interest. In the letter sent to the mayor and council, he further wrote that people who own land in areas being examined for redevelopment would need to recuse themselves from discussing and voting on the matter.

However, Karabinchak fired back that someone owning land in town might have partners in LLCs who would benefit, and that if a redevelopment plan goes through, a person might still benefit, even if they hadn't voted on the issue.

Still others were concerned over the fact that several council members said that they either had not read or only just recently read the application sent from the township to the state that led to Trenton's permission to form a redevelopment agency. The document, a weighty tome detailing the mechanics of how the organization could work, contains information that the council should know before voting on it. This was where Karabinchak, who managed to obtain a copy, was able to get the $165,000 start-up cost figure.

"I don't see how you could take a vote without reading the document. It's quite extensive," said Karabinchak.

Councilman Wayne Mascola later said that he also had a copy that he had read, and that it's not being hidden from the council, and that all they have to do to see it is to ask.

Still, resident Bruce Papkin said that there still wasn't enough information being provided to the public regarding the agency, and that most of what he knows about them came not from the township but from the Internet.

"Methinks something stinks here in Edison," said Papkin. He then told Prasad that he is inAmerica and should beAmerican, referencing an article read by another resident expressing Choi's desire in 2006 to build the South Asian business district on Oak Tree Road. This comment drew positive reaction from the audience but sharp rebuke from the council.

"There were several direct and indirect innuendos made and outright calls to go home. Insulting individuals here is common practice.…You say 'go home.'We are home. And we will stay here. Make no mistake about that," said Prasad.

The decision to table the ordinance amid questions and concerns over its language was proposed by Griffin-Ussak, though it was noted by TownshipAttorney Jeff Lehrer that unless there are substantive changes to the ordinance's workings, there will not be any public discussion the next time the measure comes before the council.

Councilman Anthony Massaro said that the ordinance was worth tabling so they could explicitly lay out the powers and abilities of the redevelopment agency.

"I think this is certainly worth tabling. … If the council truly wishes to rein in these powers, we should mean what we say and say what we mean. … To say it's on a case-by-case basis…leaves too much to chance," said Massaro.

Councilwoman Melissa Perilstein said that she still supports the formation of a redevelopment agency but had no problem with tabling it until a later date. She also addressed the rancorous nature of the debate that night and said that in a democracy, people are perfectly free to disagree.

"Sometimes perspectives and opinions differ. That is what democracy is all about," said Perilstein.