Excitement at Township Committee Meeting
Last week’s Township committee delivered on the expectation of excitement, just not from what was expected.
Turf Field
An ordinance for road improvement and improvements for public safety failed at the July meeting because Committeemen Tom Critelli and DJ Luccarelli both voted no to the ordinance stating that they would like to add $1.5 million for a multipurpose artificial turf field. Before the bond ordinance was introduced again at the meeting on Tuesday night, residents made public comments imploring the Township Committee to pass the bond ordinance. Former Mayor Eric Hinds appeared for the second time in about 1 ½ years and offered that user groups such as his soccer club could share 40 – 60% of the cost of a new turf field.
Before the voting Critelli said that he was glad he did what he did because he got people’s attention. Both Critelli and Luccarelli continued the narrative that a turf field has been talked about for 7 years but nothing was done. Two residents pointed out that there was a town wide survey sent to every household received and that the results of the survey, which was deemed to be “statistically accurate” and released in 2018, ranked the need for a multipurpose turf field below top ten.
Committeeman Prakash Santhana also stated that when the Holmdel Youth Athletic Association (“HYAA”) submitted its list for recommended recreation improvements in 2018 (the basis for the $2.5 million bond ordinance in 2019), the HYAA beyond replacing the infield for the baseball fields at Phillips Park, did NOT ask for a multipurpose turf field.
Critelli and Luccarelli made a motion to add $1.5 million to the ordinance for an artificial turf field. Santhana, who was in opposition of the motion, stated that we don’t have any specifics as to location, plans and cost estimates for a turf field. Any unspecified authorization for a bond issuance is tantamount to being a “slush fund” which got the Township into trouble in 2019. When that motioned failed to pass, Critelli and Luccarelli both voted yes to the introduction of the $2.67 million bond ordinance for road improvements and improvements for public safety.
The hearing and voting will be at a special TC meeting scheduled on August 24,2021 at 9 AM. Due to the delay in getting the bond ordinance approved and the 30-day required “estoppel” period after passage on August 24th, the window for actually implementing road paving in 2021 has narrowed significantly.
There is good news for proponents of the turf field. Given that the Recreation Committee has made great stride on this issue and, together, with the offer for soccer club and other user groups, there seems to be support for a turf field as long as the process is an open and transparent. Mayor Buontempo indicated that he would support putting turf field on a future agenda as long as specifics such as location, plans, and estimated costs are known. At that point in time, there would a public hearing and discussion for it and then the Township Committee could vote on it.
Enclave and the Host Community Agreement
It turned out that the discussions for the turf field and the voting for the road improvement and public safety improvement bond ordinance was just the warm-up act. The real excitement for the night came on the introduction of an ordinance to accept a “Host Community Agreement” with the Enclave at Holmdel.
Most Holmdel residents are familiar with Potter’s Farm located on Red Hill Road right opposite of Exit 114 at the Garden State Parkway. What may be under the radar is the fact that the Potter family sold this property 1 ½ years ago to the Enclave at Holmdel, Inc. (“Enclave”). The Enclave is part of the nonprofit group United Methodist Communities which has a 114-year history of meeting the needs of older adults in New Jersey.
The Enclave proposes to build a dementia assisted living facility on the property and has applied for land use variances with the Holmdel Zoning Board. The public hearing for this application is currently scheduled to be on the agenda of the Zoning Board on September 22nd.
Things got excited during the roll call for the introduction of the ordinance to enter into the Host Community Agreement with the Enclave. Critelli called the payment as PILOT and effectively said that that this was “pay to play”. Critelli stated that this was bad optics and analogized it to when Santhana called out the political contribution by a developer during an application review at a Planning Board for the Barclay Square development.
The incident referred to by Critelli relates to the developer of Barclay Square, a development in the flood prone area next to Palmer Square Condominiums that was included in the latest round of affordable housing settlement. The only political contributions by that developer to any Holmdel or Monmouth County candidate in 30 years was in 2017 to then-Deputy Mayor Pat Impreveduto who was running for Monmouth County Commissioner (then known as Freeholder). Whether it was by coincidence or not, Barclay Square was added to Holmdel’s affordable housing plan in 2017 even though it was denied by the Planning Board just the prior year due to flooding concerns.
Background
In 2019, Bayshore Medical Center, another nonprofit organization, reached an agreement to pay approximately $192,500 annually (subject to a 2% annual increase) to Holmdel Township. The annual payment is neither a tax nor Payment In Lieu of Taxes (“PILOT) but, instead, a “community service contribution” in recognition of public safety services provided by the Township.
The Enclave is a 501(c)3 nonprofit that is exempt from federal, state, and local income taxes. According to the draft Host Community Agreement, the Enclave represents that it is exempt from property taxes pursuant to NJ statutes. However, the Enclave approached the Township indicating that, subject to the Zoning Board’s approval of its application, it was important to them to make annual contributions in recognition of local services provided by the Township. The agreed amount in the draft agreement is $95,000 per year, about ½ of the amount in the agreement with Bayshore Medical Center.
PILOT Payment, NOT
Both Critelli and Luccarelli acknowledged that the Host Community Agreement (“HCA”) and the amount agreed to were previously discussed (presumably in executive session) but that they didn’t realize it was going to be on the agenda ahead of the Zoning Board approval of the application.
There are some issues with the characterization by Critelli and Luccarelli of the payments as PILOT and pay-to-play. The Enclave is a 501(c)3 tax-exempt organization and represents that under NJ statutes is exempt from property tax. PILOT payments are “in lieu” of property tax. In this case, there is no obligation for property tax. In other words, the option for the Township is to negotiate the best deal it could get and accept the money or receive no money at all.
Critelli also said that the amount may not be sufficient. The thought process was that the property could allow, potentially, 20 residential unit to be developed and, if fully developed, this might be the equivalent of around $500,00 in property taxes (20 x $25,000 per property) that the Township could receive. However, regardless of the potential development of a property, property tax is based on actual improvements as well as individual facts and circumstances of the property owner. As an example, even if a property has the potential to be developed up to 20 units but the owner chooses to only build one unit, the Township would be hard-pressed to argue that property tax should be based on the potential of 20 units. Tax records show that the 18-acre lots were assessed for $14,500 in total taxes last year, primarily as qualified farmland.
Pay-To-Play
The fact that Critelli invoked pay-to-play is interesting. New Jersey pay-to-play laws address political contributions made by business entities that are party to or are attempting to obtain contracts or favorable positions with New Jersey government entities. Specifically, the laws address contributions to an individual political candidate. In the case referenced by Critelli, Pat Impreveduto personally benefited from the developer’s contribution to his campaign committee. In this case, there is no political donation to any members of the Township Committee. The beneficiary of the HCA is the Township, which will then benefit all Holmdel residents.
At the meeting, the Township Attorney explained that this was at the request of the Enclave. It is not clear whether the HCA has been or will be disclosed at the Zoning Board hearing. The Zoning Board is independent, its members served on a voluntary basis with no compensation, and reviews an application based on land use laws. It is very rare that the financial implication (e.g., potential tax revenue) of an application is considered by the Zoning or Planning Board.
In an ideal world, the Enclave would disclose the Host Community agreement to the Zoning Board in its hearing and the Township Committee should then consider the agreement such a decision is made by the Zoning Board. The Township Committee may have jumped the gun a little but it’s not clear how pay-to-play is involved. No individual member of the Zoning Board or the Township Committee will benefit directly by the HCA (except indirectly along with all Holmdel residents).
“Respect the Potter Family”
During the public comment session, Terrence Wall, a current BOE member looking to run for re-election, made an impassioned plea to respect the Potter family. The property was sold by the Potter family more than a year ago in what appears to be an arms-length transaction by a willing seller and a willing buyer for about $4 million. We are not aware that the property was ever offered to the Township for purchase as part of an effort to preserve open space or as an operating farm. The Potter family has nothing to do with Enclave’s application and has not made any public statement regarding Enclave’s proposed use. It’s unclear what aspect of Enclave’s proposed development is disrespectful of the Potter family.
Preserve Potter’s Farm
The very next morning, Republican Township Committee candidate Rocco Impreveduto, who attended his first Township Committee meeting in person, posted about the meeting on social media. In addition to calling the payments in the HCA as PILOT and echoing Critelli’s comments about pay-to-play, Impreveduto called to preserve Potter’s Farm. He also wrote, “I was STUNNED to see COMMITTEEMAN SANTHANA vote in favor of Holmdel receiving PILOT money from Potters farm without having even read the plans!”
The draft of the HCA was attached to the agenda. Presumably, in addition to the Township Attorney’s overview, there were more details provided when this was discussed previously in an executive session before authorization was granted to go forward with discussion and negotiation with the Enclave. Except for timing, both Critelli and Luccarelli seem to support the agreement but there is no indication that either one of them has read the plans as well.
It is the Zoning Board and not the Township Committee that will be reviewing the Enclave application and to decide to grant or deny the application for land use variances. Given the overview and any additional information provided by the Township Attorney, it is not unclear why any member of the Township Committee must read the actual Zoning Board application/plans before deciding whether to vote one way or another for the HCA.
Equally interesting is the call to preserve Potter’s Farm by Impreveduto. In April 2017, the Township Committee which included Rocco’s father, Pat Impreveduto as the Deputy Mayor, formally invited MFC, a real estate development company, to present a concept plan for the development of Potter’s Farm which called for 120-130 units (3-story structures) with up to 24 to 34 affordable units (see site plan). According to a lawsuit filed in 2017, MFC claimed that in May 2017, “we received word from the Township that its officials and design professionals liked our ‘Potter Farms’ site proposal, unanimously (informally) approving of its inclusion in the Township’s affordable housing as part of a settlement … with Fair Share Housing Center.” The Potter’s Farm proposal was included in a public meeting held by the Township Committee on June 27, 2017 that explained the affordable housing plan and proposed settlement.
During that June 2017 public hearing, neither Rocco Impreveduto nor Wall made any comments about preserving Potter’s Farm. Both Impreveduto and Wall are candidates in the November election and now seem to object to a proposal for a less-denser development (15 one-story residential units plus one 2-story town center building under the Enclave proposal vs. 120-130 three-story units under the MFC proposal) that looks to preserve the current look of Potter’s Farm by agreeing to maintain a barn and open space field with animals in the front of their facility.
Many Holmdel residents will miss the bucolic nature of Potter’s Farm. However, it was well known that the Potter family was looking to sell that property. Certainly, by June 2017, this became public knowledge. It seems that anyone really interested in “preserving Potter’s Farm” would or should have made the call for action before the Potter family sold their property in a free market transaction more than a year ago.
Public Questions
Somewhat lost in all the above excitement is the approval of three public questions that will appear on this November election ballot. More to come on this in the future.
Comments