Rug mill ordinance prompts cynicism

Councilman, Dems’ leader suggest developer’s lawsuit may be to blame

By Vic Monaco, Managing Editor
   HIGHTSTOWN — Last week Borough Councilman Ryan Rosenberg said a worsening economy was the only change since the council rejected dropping a requirement that a rug mill redeveloper contribute nearby municipal office space.
   This week, as his colleagues were about to reintroduce the same measure that was voted down 4-2 in December, the councilman apparently had given that a little more thought and found something just as obvious.
   ”Absolutely nothing has changed between that point and this point, except a lawsuit has been filed against us,” he said Monday night to his colleagues. “So, I just think it may set a bad precedent by saying … to the next developer who wants to come to Hightstown, ‘All you have to do is file a lawsuit against us, whether it be frivolous and without merit, you know what? We’re going to back down and we’re going to do what you want.’”
   John Wolfington, owner of the Bank Street mill property, in January sued the borough, seeking to overturn the current redevelopment ordinance and recoup more than $250,000 he says he’s spent for local review and planning. The pending ordinance, introduced Monday, would allow him to make a payment in lieu of the municipal construction. Borough officials previously said that payment would be $350,000, which pales in comparison to the cost of rehabilitating space at the 47-year-old municipal building.
   Councilman Rosenberg was joined Monday night by Councilwoman Constance Harinxma in saying they still stand against the ordinance and would not vote to introduce it. But the introduction was approved 4-2, with a hearing and vote on it scheduled for Oct. 6.
   Chris Moraitis, president of the local Democratic Club, was even more critical than Councilman Rosenberg after introduction of the ordinance.
   ”It’s a pretty sad day when we have the same ordinance with a new council member and a lawsuit,” he said. “It shows how quickly our knees can buckle to a little pressure.”
   Given the amount of public opposition to the ordinance late last year, he added, the council’s action showed a “lack of humility.”
   Earlier in the meeting, former Democratic Club President Torry Watkins and Kathy Patten, wife of Mayor Bob Patten, who favors the ordinance, urged for approval. Ms. Patten said doing so is just about all the council can do to help mitigate the rising local tax rate, by creating a 130-unit residential ratable.
   Mr. Moraitis disagreed.
   ”I think it’s naive to think that by developing this site we will have significant or any tax deduction past a couple years from now,” he said. “I think we’re looking to mortgage the borough’s future to make ends meet today.”
   One way some borough officials hope to generate tax revenue is through a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes program, which allows a municipality to keep 95 percent of such payments from homeowners for a number of years rather than sharing tax revenue with its school district. Park Avenue resident Christie Palmer pointed out to the council that there is much opposition to PILOT programs, including from some state lawmakers and the East Windsor Regional district, and urged that its mention be removed from the ordinance.
   Since the last vote on the ordinance, Jeff Bond has been seated on the council. He said he favored it last year but also told the Herald that he didn’t intend to support a reintroduction of the same ordinance this year.
   Nonetheless, he voted in favor of reintroducing it Monday.
   So, too, did Councilman Larry Quattrone, who voted against the ordinance last year but said last week that he would have a difficult time doing likewise this year because “we have to make a move somehow.”
   The borough has been negotiating for more than four years to have Mr. Wolfington redevelop the 7-acre site behind the municipal building. Mr. Wolfington, who bought the property in 2006 for more than $3 million, sued the borough after the council rejected what would be the second recent change to the borough redevelopment ordinance. The council in 2006 raised the allowable number of residential units on the property from 80 to 130 after Mr. Wolfington made a similar increase in the number of units he wants to build.
   Council President Walter Sikorski declined to comment on the alleged link between the reintroduction and the lawsuit. He did point out that he voted to approve the ordinance last year, before the suit was filed.