« Eagle Rock Reservation, Nightfall, 9/11/06 | Main | If You Build It, They Will Protest »

Decisions, No Drama At Montclair Council Meeting

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

The mood at last night’s council meeting in Montclair did not resemble the contentious angry atmosphere of recent meetings. Surprisingly subdued, ordinances and motions were passed quickly and at the end of the evening, the council and Mayor Remsen primarily won accolades from residents commending them on their decisions to slow down developers, preserve history, and postpone spending on signage.

The downzoning ordinance was quickly passed, with only one abstention by Sandra Lang (who claimed she was not sufficiently informed) R3 zones were rezoned R2, with 3 residences on Claremont exempted. About 10 disgruntled people immediately left council chambers – one was heard saying “I wish they’d downgrade my taxes.” But this is a major victory residents of North Mountain who have been fighting an oversized plan to develop 21 North Mountain. The new ordinance will send developer Desmond Neill back to the drawing board. Several council members and residents acknowledged that downzoning is not the perfect solution to a broader problem. For now, they feel it is the right decision. The council fully expects to revisit and revise the ordinance as needed.

Huestis House, at 4 Duryea was unanimously approved for designation as a historic landmark, preserving it from the wrecking ball. It was the first time the council has called for historic preservation of a private residence in Montclair.

The Wayfinding Project was tabled for at least a couple of months. Mayor Remsen stated that at this time it made no sense to engage the consultant Cloud Gehshan. Several councilors said Wayfinding still makes sense, but everyone agreed that budget-wise, the timing was terrible, and it was time to regroup and thoroughly rethink it. Mayor Remsen stated that if implemented, those who would most benefit might be asked to pull out their check books. Quote of the evening, by Gerald Tobin: “The Wayfinding system is expensive because it’s so good.”

Activist Pegi Adam told the council “you nixed the wayfinding tonight, just nix it forever” - the room erupted in applause.

High property taxes, the sewer utility, the conflict of Montclair’s CFO holding two jobs, and a bounced tax refund check were brought to the council’s attention. A resident chose to announce the imminent arrival of Trader Joe's, which he read about in Baristanet. Remsen replied "Then it must be true." One of the most stinging critiques was eloquently stated by a resident citing the Mayor's lack of stewardship in leading the council toward historic preservation, and the lack of proactive measures taken to safeguard land use. “Your first attempt to stop overdevelopment only came after pressure from residents.”

And the lawsuit? It did come up, but David Herron, one of the plaintiffs, made it clear that this is not just Ted Mattox’s lawsuit. “It came about because a group of community minded citizens joined forces to move forward in the same direction,” he said. “People concerned about the perception that their opinions don’t matter to the township government.”

Posted by Annette Batson on September 13, 2006 9:22 AM
Email this story |
 

Thanks again Barista for keeping us informed. A crazy back to school schedule kept me away, but I was hoping that you would have the headlines. You didn't disappiont.

Posted by Montclair Mommy | September 13, 2006 9:25 AM
 

Thank you for the update. Barista. I had a "family emergency" last night (no babysitter) and couldn't attend. Did anybody bring up the Alarm registration fee? I loved the wording on the bill: "This service is provided at no cost to the taxpayers"??? How come that then I have to write a 50$ check, which the town splits with a private company ATB in Colorado (80% MTC/20% ATB). If noone mentioned that to "our" council, I'll be sure to do that at the next meeting. And what happened to opposition against the leaf bagging? Leaves are starting to fall and now we are all happily bagging again???

Posted by Sylvia | September 13, 2006 9:25 AM
 

at the end of the evening, the council and Mayor Remsen primarily won accolades from residents commendeding them on their decisions to slow down developers, preserve history, and postpone spending on signage.
and no apologies of what happened in the past and it won't happen in the future?
After all this time, I really hope they got the message!


Posted by Ari | September 13, 2006 9:37 AM
 

Too bad they didn't put an end to the new baseball field. You know, the one that is costing $850,000 to move 17 feet into a grove of historic trees.

Doe anyone really not think Remsy is behind this one? Mr. Montclair Baseball himself.

You can bet he gets his Wayfinding project done before he announces that he will not run for mayor or he steps down.

Unfortunately, Remsy gets what he wants because it's his slate/council, minus Mattox and Lang.

 

The decision to vote on tabling wayfinding was only included in the agenda at the last minute. It was so last minute that it didn't make it onto the printed agenda available at the back of the room. It was included on a separate paper. Does anyone really believe, especially based on this timing, that the wayfinding issue was tabled because the council "saw the light" or because they saw the lawsuit hours before.

So basically the councilors all stated they were voting as such because of the comments they had received from people in town (it sounded as they had been coached, the explanations were so similar). Not a one mentioned the lawsuit.

So did the council do something illegal as the lawsuit states? Well, they certainly did an about face on wayfinding when faced with legal consequences. What's next? Will they choose to fight for no-bid "contracts" with the MEDC and MAC? Or will they quickly about face on this also claiming they've heard what the people want?

Posted by Anonymous | September 13, 2006 10:05 AM
 

Excellent re: Huestis House. Good job!

Posted by Mountie for Life | September 13, 2006 11:48 AM
 

I attended last night's
meeting, and was confused
about the "Down Zoning"
issue. It was listed as a
pending ordinance (R-3, R-2
zones)and a motion was
started to table voting.
Council members amended
the ordinance, excluding
and removing 315, 319 and
323 Claremont Avenue
from the effects of such
zoning designation.
However, instead of
following through with
tabling the ordinance to
a later date, council
voted 6-1 (Lang abstained)
to pass this ordinance.
Although it was written
that Section 347-4 of
the Township Code was
passed first reading
on August 1, 2006--it
was NOT. Sometimes, it's
worse to go to all the
meetings. There's so
much misinformation and
spinning of facts, you
can't believe what you
hear. During the public
comments session, a
homeowner asked whether
a "neighborhood can
opt out of" the rezoning
ordinace. Attorney
Trembulak stated: "You
may file an appeal, or
YOU CAN SUE." Hahahaha.
We'll have to wait in
line to sue the Council
et al, won't we?

Posted by SkepticalSusie | September 13, 2006 1:48 PM
 

Downzoning or no Downzoning, the real problem has not been addressed - In Montclair, we still do not have any real Historic Preservation Laws, open space regulations or architectural review. Until we have these regulations in place, the downzoning is just like putting a bandage on a malignant tumor.

Posted by Frank Gerard Godlewski | September 13, 2006 2:55 PM
 

note to the poster who mentioned the burglar alarm issue--i have strong opinions on that too. could it be the next nitpicking thing to tackle? little steps lead to forward movement, pegi

Posted by pegi adam | September 13, 2006 5:45 PM
 

Hi Pegi!

Congrats!

Now that you got them to stop blowing the $721,000 on needless signs,

Is there anything you can do to stop the BOE from spending $850,00 to move the ball field at Woodman seventeen feet?

Posted by Anonymous | September 13, 2006 6:23 PM
 

Is everyone forgetting the $50,000,000 Middle School that appears to be unnecessary as it will add very few additional classrooms? Neither the B of E nor the Council has made a convincing case for this expenditure other than some insisting that there was a "covenant" to build a school in the intended location. The town could afford a lot of signage and field enlargements if the money was not spent as intended.

Posted by the big issue | September 13, 2006 7:41 PM
 

If you sat in on the presentation from the architect who described the school at a board meeting last Spring, you'd fall off your chair.

This is another one of those projects that "just seems to happen." POORLY thought through!

Adds 150 additional seats. Hey how many new kids is Sienna going to bring in? How about the new gazillion apartment complex at the Ford dealership?

Heck, we've outgrown this thing even before it's built!

And I have yet to see ANY projection of an operating budget!

You think the current $100MM BOE budget is a lot? Wait till the hiring and the other operating expenses for this school start to come in!

And don't foget: the school that they sold that necessitated the construction of this $50MM behemoth? The Grove School. And they got $1MM for it.

And they want to know why we want an elected board and the ability to vote on the budget? Maybe it's because you guys are clueless!

Posted by retired in Montclair | September 13, 2006 8:16 PM
 

but don't forget, because most people were not here when the grove street school was sold. Our very own Joyce Michaelson was on the Board of Education, and yes she did vote to sell the school. You choose wrong Joyce.

Posted by minority majority | September 13, 2006 8:25 PM
 

"A resident chose to announce the imminent arrival of Trader Joe's, which he read about in Baristanet. Remsen replied "Then it must be true." "

Well, I was the one who brought that topic up!

What with all the talk in this town about obtaining commercial ratables, I thought it an excellent idea that "someone" from the town should be talking to Trader Joe's about finding space in Montclair!

In fact, shouldn't a "pro-active" business group be looking for opportunities like this?

The Mayor's reaction indicated to me that he didn't really take the suggestion seriously. But, Why not?

So, if the Mayor, or the MEDC, or the BID isn't interested in following up, maybe some smart developer could look to help out?

Steve? Where are you? Your town needs you!

Posted by carya | September 13, 2006 9:10 PM
 

I think frank has a good idea, but you must do it for the entire town and not just single out the buyers after they purchase the property.I do think what the town has done since Crisco is ass backwards, since thier the ones who approved it, and now they have no problem making decisions and changing laws after properties are purchased, and possibly hurting people fianancialy.Just be prepared by letting a historic comittee govern what is done to your houses exterior, means say goodbye to vinyl siding and vinyl replacement windows, which i'm sure many of you have.What the town has done concerning the last few issues Duryea, N. Mtn, Rezoning an entire neighborhood is wrong and i'm sure it has hurt a lot more than just a developer or two.

Posted by do it for everyone | September 13, 2006 9:38 PM
 

do it ... excellent points!

Posted by Anonymous | September 13, 2006 9:42 PM
 

to SkepticalSusie above:

I think you may have misheard what was said at the start of the meeting. There was no proposal to table, since the ordinance was ALREADY tabled; that's what they did at the previous council meeting, following a motion to table by Tobin. What they did was untable it, amend it with regard to those Claremont properties, and then vote on it. It would have been impossible (and unnecessary) to table an already tabled ordinance.

You're also confused about what passage of first reading means. That does not mean they voted to pass the ordinance. Normal procedure is that an ordinance has a first reading by the council before it is formally and publicly brought up. If a proposal passes on first reading, then the public is notified and it is put on the council agenda for a vote. The downzoning proposal did pass its first reading; it was at the next council meeting when it was tabled.

Whatever your feelings pro- or con-downzoning, the council did follow correct procedure. And for those of you against it, think about this: the fact that the Mayor and Ted Mattox both supported this says a lot about how much sense it makes!

Posted by lowermontclair | September 13, 2006 10:00 PM
 

Good for them.

Posted by appletony | September 13, 2006 10:57 PM
 

I was here when the Grove Street school was sold, and wondered why, since the Baby Boomers were beginning to have children.

It could have been renovated to become the library, since the original library was already becoming too small. At least the school had parking.

Posted by Inquiring Minds | September 14, 2006 8:40 AM
 

"I was here when the Grove Street school was sold, and wondered why"

Did you ever think that some of the people making decisions today, and who made decisions yesterday, just don't/didn't know what they're doing?

Are you impressed with their ability to analyze projects, think through financial implications?

Posted by Anonymous | September 14, 2006 9:43 AM
 

Obviously, my 'wondering' was of a rhetorical nature.

I think that, to a greater or lesser degree, there has been a tremendous pressure on the various township administrations to try to keep the taxes down. Short term approaches, ban-aid approaches have been implimented to provide an injection of cash, which they think will tide the town over until the next guy has to deal with it.

This town has no office park, or light manufacturing as some of our neighbors do, and no, I'm not advocating smokestacks here.

The tax burden, whatever it is, has to be borne by the residents. The fact that there's a (usually) large church on every corner, provides no tax relief. And no, I'm not anti-religion; I know firsthand the wonderful work that the churches in this town do to support the community.

I've also been around long enough to recall that there was some short-lived talk about the Marboro Inn being converted into a skilled care or assisted living facility, which would have provided a ratable and jobs, but the residents were afraid there would be sirens at all hours of the day and night.

I also recall the neighbors didn't want the Inn to have a liquor license, because they were afraid of noisy patrons leaving in the wee small hrs.

Careful what you wish for...

Posted by Inquiring Minds | September 14, 2006 10:15 AM
 

Property taxes have to be paid on the ten empty Crisco homes, so I don't think there's been a loss of ratables.

Posted by appletony | September 14, 2006 10:20 AM
 

appletony, agreed, there's no apparent loss of ratables, but what is the net when you consider how many children will be added into the school system? There are plans to build a school now that will be too small before it's finished.

Posted by Inquiring Minds | September 14, 2006 10:27 AM
 

Since the talk is on taxes, I would like to reply to a good question that Hiding in Baristaville asked me on August 25 - I just saw it today when I followed a link. The question was:

"What do you want the Town to do for you [Fourth Ward taxpayers]?

I would like the Township Manager to enforce Codes in the 4th Ward on properties being neglected by absentee owners.

I would like the Council to review (what are likely outdated) Code fines and penalties. Many of the Code problems are caused by greedy absentee owners who just pay the $1,000 fine, which is now cheaper than making repairs!

I would like the Township to deal with the horrible commercial facades and filth on lower Bloomfield Ave and Maple Avenue.

I would like the Council to set a policy that takes strong action when landlords with Section 8 contracts rent to tenants who are a constant source of neighborhood disruption, drug dealing and police response. This is abuse of tax-exempt dollars intended to help people improve their lives, not degrade others' lives.

I would like the Council to tell Essex County to enforce the law in Glenfield Park 24hrs a day and stop allowing activities that attract huge crowds and generate amplified noise. The park is small and 50ft from private homes!

This IS NOT a simple racial issue - These irresponsible property owners are black, white, brown, Anglo, Jewish, etc. and several are "prominent citizens" of Baristaville!

Posted by black nana | September 14, 2006 2:11 PM
 

Black Nana, don't think anyone would disagree with you on these points. Have you brought it up at a council meeting?

Have you asked Sandra Lang to help you bring these concerns out at a meeting?

Posted by Anonymous | September 14, 2006 2:26 PM
 

No one would argue that a focus on bringing ratables into the town would be well advised.

Yet I have to wonder about the effort and creativity of the town leaders to do this.

For example, when one resident suggested at last Tuesday's council meeting that Trader Joes had an interest in Montclair the Mayor pretty much blew him off.

The new Whole Foods is being built in West Orange. Couldn't someone have made an effort to try and find property in Montclair for them? The Parking Garage on Orange comes to mind. It would have made a nice two story Whole Foods, like they have in Evanston Illinois.

Instead, it was "given" to a car dealer with a long term tax abatement.

This isn't the only development that has been given a tax abatement, and we have yet to see a financial analysis showing us how these benefit us.

Is there any group helping the town look for ratables, or do we expect that they're just going to come knocking on our door?

Or, is that what we're expecting the MEDC to do?

If we've left that to the MEDC, perhaps now is the time to take the problem more seriously.

Posted by Pennypincher | September 16, 2006 7:21 AM
 

Penny is absolutely right! The council belly aches about ratables, but what are they doing to bring commercial business into Montclair?

MEDC? Aren't these the guys we just cut off funding to? And why are we leaving something this important to a private group?

Posted by Anonymous | September 16, 2006 8:12 AM
 

Obviously the MDEC isn't living up to their Mission Statement

http://www.montclair-medc.org/

"To enhance the economic vitality of the Township of Montclair by supporting existing businesses, stimulating new business development and advising the Township government on economic and business issues. "

Posted by Not Hiding | September 16, 2006 8:56 AM
 

Maybe we can spur the Montclair Town Council on by suggesting properties for the New Trader Joe's.

If they don't jump on it Bloomfield will get it and we'll all be driving there because Trader Joes is just too good to pass up.

I vote for the former FORD dealership on Bloomfield Ave- lots of parking, easy on and off to a main street, gives the town ratables instead of more kids in school and it's a large enough site.

Posted by Lets Beat the MEDC until they DO their job | September 16, 2006 9:08 AM
 

I understand DeCozen is moving. What a great property!

MEDC's mission statement is "advising the Township government on economic and business issues?"

Isn't this important enough that the council have an INDEPENDENT group with both ELECTED officials and TAXPAYERS?

Many Montclair residents are well qualified to serve on a committee to increase ratables.

It doesn't seem to me that the MEDC, consisting of many business owners, is the group to be "in charge."

Of course, having intelligent residents serve on committees is dangerous and against the town motto which is:

We don't need your advice. We'll do what we want to do. Sit down, shut up, and pay!

Posted by Anonymous | September 16, 2006 10:58 PM
 

I agree with Hiding. Everyone says something needs to be done about "ratables" and now we're told "economic development" is the MEDC's job.

That's like saying the promotion of global commerce in the United States is the job of Ford.

We DO neet a high powered group to serious attack the challenge of finding new commercial ratables for Montclair!

How about it Town Council? Any ideas?

Posted by Pennypincher | September 17, 2006 6:09 AM
 

"I understand DeCozen is moving. What a great property!"

Is that the Jaguar place on Bloomfield Ave just west of Valley RD?

If I remember correctly there's lots of parking and a good sized store - a little close to Whole Foods - but competition is good!

A committee of townsfolk and business owners sounds about right.

The Town Council should move as swiftly as they did on stopping Wayfinding (after the lawsuit of course).

So can we expect a new series of telephone calls, ED? This time don't leave Teddy out or we'll see the pattern.

Will you be ready with a new volunteer group by the newxt Council Meeting on Septemeber 26th???

We'll be watching.

Posted by NOT Hiding | September 17, 2006 7:59 AM
 

i decided to check to see what the fuss was concerning no bid contracts, and the new suit served on the town council. Well here it is, and the town should really have known better. I was dismayed recently to hear Tobin at a council meeting asking Mattox, "If he (Mattox) was a lawyer. One should not have to be, in order to do the correct thing, or understand the correct thing. A group of law students at Rutgers got togethers and did a little research. Here is what we found, and .......................

IT MAYBE TIME FOR REMSEN AND THE GANG TO FOLD THIS HAND AND PACK UP THEIR TENTS.................

LOCAL PUBLIC CONTRACT LAW

40A:11-5 Exceptions.

5. Any contract the amount of which exceeds the bid threshold, (21,000)may be negotiated and awarded by the governing body without public advertising for bids and bidding therefore and shall be awarded by resolution of the governing body if:

(1) The subject matter thereof consists of:

(a) (i) Professional services. The governing body shall in each instance state supporting reasons for its action in the resolution awarding each contract and shall forthwith cause to be printed once, in the official newspaper, a brief notice stating the nature, duration, service and amount of the contract, and the resolution and contract are on file and available for public inspection in the office of the clerk of the county or municipality, or, in the case of a contraction unit created by more than one county or municipality, of the counties or municipalities creating such contracting unit, or (ii)Extraordinary unspecifiable services. The application of this exception shall be construed narrowly in favor of open competitive bidding, whenever possible, and the Division of Local Government Services is authorized to adopt and promulgate rules and regulations. The governing body shall in each instance state supporting reasons for its action in the resolution awarding each contract and shall forthwith cause to be printed, in the manner set forth in subsection (1)(a)(i) of this section, a brief notice of the award of such contract.


Posted by Anonymous | September 17, 2006 8:36 AM
 

Im sure that Ed "The puking Mayor" Remsen thought

$21,000
$40,000
$120,000

What's the difference? I AM THE KING OF THIS FOREST


If I were King of the Forest,
Not Queen, not Duke, not Prince.
My regal robes of the forest
Would be satin, not cotton, not chintz.
I'd command each thing, be it fish or fowl,
With a woof and a woof, and a royal growl--woof.
As I'd click my heel,
All the trees would kneel
And the mountains bow,
And the bulls kowtow,
And the sparrow would take wing
'F--I ... 'f ... I ... were King.

Posted by Anonymous | September 17, 2006 8:45 AM
 

OOPS- forgot my signature- that's mine with the lyrics.

The one witht the LOCAL PUBLIC CONTRACT LAW is not but the poster is my brother in this fight!

Posted by Hiding #457 | September 17, 2006 8:49 AM
 

Adriana O'Toole Homes

Your Color Source

Joe Bartoni's








Weather
Movies
TV

Gmail
NJ Transit
DeCamp
People Search
Google Maps
Dictionary
Google News
Homeland Security
Essex County News
High School Sports
» MONTCLAIR LINKS
ABOUT
Official Montclair Website
Montclair Center
Montclair Schools
Montclair Community Pre-K
Montclair State University
American Towns
Town Profile
THE ARTS
Arts Montclair
Montclair Art Museum
Montclair Arts Council
Peak Performances
Youth Orchestras of Essex County
ATTRACTIONS
New Jersey Jackals
Presby Iris Gardens
Van Vleck Gardens
COMMUNITY
Montclair Adult School
Montclair Public Library
Montclair YMCA
Mountainside Health Foundation
Red Cross
Toni's Kitchen
COMMUTING
The Clever Commute
Montclair-Boonton Line Train Schedule
FORUMS/BLOGS
Montclair Journal
Montclair Watercooler
Montclair Unmoderated
NJ.com Montclair Forum
ORGANIZATIONS
Bike Montclair
Brookdale Park Conservancy
Friends of Anderson Park
League of Women Voters of the Montclair Area
MEWS
Montclair Engineers
MFEE/Montclair Reads
Montclair Fund for Women
Montclair Historical Society
Montclair PTA
Montclair Wildlife
Outpost in the Burbs
OTHER
New Jersey Life and Leisure
VillageRadio

» GLEN RIDGE LINKS
» BLOOMFIELD LINKS
» OUTER BARISTAVILLE
» OF INTEREST BLOGS
BARISTAS
jjschiffer.com
Madeleine Bake Shop
Politics of Place
Read Me, Love Me, Buy the Book
stopkatie.com
Wanderful!!!
ARTISTS

Artisan Studio Underground
Artist / Blacksmith Charlie Spademan
Dust and Rust
habit-image-reaction
I Will Kick Your Ass For World Peace
Regia Richest
CULTURE
La Tertulia
FOOD
Cat Food
Chowhound
Hungry Chef
Mano a Vino
Table Hopping with Rosie
FORUMS
E-gullet NJ
Springsteen Forum
GARDENING
The Gardeners Apprentice
The Gardening Guru
GO GREEN
Green Jersey
Reuse and Recycle in Montclair
HEALTH
Medicana
NEW JERSEY
Bada Bing Blog
Blog Net News NJ
Jersey Side
NJ.com
NJHotShots
NJ My Way
Weird NJ
OF USE
Craig's List NJ
PetFinder
Urban Dictionary
PARENTING
Dante's Inferno with Children
FinSlippy
Looky Daddy
The Mamahood
Raisinology
Who's the Grown Up?
PERSONAL
55 Secret Street
Anovelista
CarreFemme
The Daily Doormatt
Detox Moxie
I Hate Decamp
Inclusive Ceremonies
Man With a Pen
Martta's World
Maui Girl's Meanderings
The Media Drop
Meg McGonagall
MOM & Pop Culture
My Life as a Rabid Blog
Richieville
RZ's Blog
Tina Bell
Snake Oil Sam
The Society for Conscious Craft
Wellness Woman
Yenta Diva
POLITICAL
Gold Finch Tech
New Jersey Politics Unusual
REAL ESTATE
Crystal Ball Real Estate
Eco Realty
TECHNOLOGY
We Give Good Tech

Email us to link your blog