Borough officials expect more legal action by Cottage Club in tax-exempt status issue
By: Nick Norlen
Tuesday’s signing by Gov. Jon Corzine of a bill clarifying historical property-tax exemptions is another step in Princeton Borough’s battle with the Cottage Club, but borough officials said Thursday that they expect litigation with the Princeton University student eating club to continue.
The bill, introduced by state Assemblyman Reed Gusciora, (D-Princeton), holds the private Prospect Avenue club to a 2004 state statute requiring tax-exempt historic sites to be open to the public for at least 96 days a year and have historical preservation as their primary mission.
According to a press release from Mr. Gusciora, the law also exempts the borough from paying approximately $300,000 in back taxes sought by the Cottage Club.
The club, which is on both the state and National Register of Historic Places, first applied for an exemption in 2002 as a historic site and a nonprofit organization.
A May ruling by the state Supreme Court reversed an earlier Appellate court’s denial of the club’s claims that the Department of Environmental Protection wrongly denied its application for tax exempt status in 2003.
Borough Attorney Michael Herbert said Thursday that the most recent legislation was carefully crafted by lawmakers to ensure that the club does not retroactively adhere to exemption standards.
That should force the club back on the tax rolls, he said, with 25 percent of its $50,000 in annual taxes going to the borough.
However, Councilman Andrew Koontz, who has been a vocal critic of the club’s efforts to win tax exemption, said he expects litigation to continue.
"(The new law) does change the legal landscape significantly and I would not be surprised if their attorney developed some other legal way of going forward," he said.
Although Mr. Herbert said he can’t speculate about what the club will do next, he said "they’ve been pretty persistent" in the past.
Mr. Koontz said he "would like to see how the Cottage Club reacts."
"I have a preference for how I think they should react," he said. "Quite frankly, they should stop with the nonsense and pay their taxes like everybody else."
However, Mr. Koontz acknowledged the fact that the club could also attempt to comply with the current requirements for historic tax exemption.
"If what they decide to do as an institution is be open 96 days of the year and allow that kind of public access, and the appropriate state agency sees to it that they comply with the law, I’d have to support that," he said. "But I find it extremely difficult to believe that that’s the action they would take."
Cottage Club attorney Thomas Olson did not return calls seeking comment.
However, he has said previously that the club is currently open for 12 days a year, and that the club’s position is that the Supreme Court decision which effectively upheld its tax-exempt status still applies.
Mr. Koontz, Mr. Herbert and Borough Mayor Mildred Trotman all agreed that the borough has no plans for further action.
"I would think their next move would dictate what action we take," Mayor Trotman said.

