City Council – 3/4/2009

3/4/2009 Bump:

Reminder: On top of the regularly scheduled 7pm council meeting tonight, there’s also an “angry citizen” rally a half-hour before.

3/2/2009:

City Council, March 4th 2009

Here is the agenda and resolution pack for this week’s City Council meeting. More to come later.

AGENDA (3 pages)
RESOLUTIONS (49 pages)

city-council-meeting-march-4-2009-hurricane-force-winds-of-lies.jpg

Citizens suggest Redevelopment Moratorium

Additionally, Hoboken residents Cheryl Fallick and Dan Tumpson have drafted a “Redevelopment Moratorium Resolution” that they want the City Council to adopt at this meeting.

CLICK HERE to read the PDF, or see it in it’s entirety after the jump…

(3/4/2009 City Council, continued…)

“Citizens of Hoboken:

Below is a self-explanatory resolution that we are asking the Hoboken City Council to adopt at their next (March 4) meeting. We ask that Council members introduce this resolution and that all citizens who care about their property taxes and quality of life encourage its passage.

(For a detailed discussion of the effect of PILOTs on property taxes, including the derivation of a formula for calculating the change in property tax rate given a redevelopment’s property value and annual PILOT payments, see http://hobokencitizens.org/PILOTseminar.doc.)

Daniel Tumpson
Cheryl Fallick

Redevelopment Moratorium Resolution

Whereas the Mayor has publicly declared his intention to advance several major redevelopment plans by the end of his current term of office; and

Whereas these redevelopment projects will significantly increase Hoboken’s building density, population, costs of governmental services, and stress on Hoboken’s infrastructure and on the quality of life of Hoboken’s residents; and

Whereas the many aspects of the nature and impact of these proposed redevelopment plans and redevelopment agreements are not known or understood by either the City Council or the Citizens of Hoboken; and

Whereas the Mayor and Council have a history of approving redevelopment agreements that may have a negative impact on Hoboken’s environment or property tax rate without fully disclosing to the public the details of redevelopment plans and agreements, including PILOT agreements, which allow the nature and extent of those impacts to be assessed; and

Whereas Hoboken Citizens have, in 1990 and 1992 referendums, twice voted to reject ordinances associated with the implementation of redevelopment agreements and have since lost the right to have a referendum vote on any aspect of redevelopment, due to the 1992 amendment of the New Jersey Local Redevelopment and Housing Law (LRHL, NJS 40A:12A-1 et seq.) which governs redevelopment designation and implementation; and

Whereas the May 2009 Hoboken Municipal election process will provide an opportunity for Mayor and City Council candidates to discuss with voters the past and potential future impacts of redevelopment on Hoboken’s environment and property tax rates so that voters may be able to assess candidates’ positions on this major issue and so have an opportunity to guide the future of redevelopment in Hoboken by their collective choice at the polls of Mayor and City Council Members;

Now, therefore, be it resolved that:

(1.) The City Council declares a moratorium on acting on any aspect of redevelopment as defined in the LRHL until after the May Hoboken municipal elections and will refrain from taking any action, including resolutions or ordinances, which move the City of Hoboken further toward:
(a.) the designation that any area of the City of Hoboken is “in need of redevelopment” as defined in the LRHL;
(b.) the approval of any aspect of a redevelopment plan or of any agreement to implement any aspect of a redevelopment plan.

(2.) Prior to any post-election consideration of any aspect of a redevelopment designation, plan, or agreement, the City Council will investigate and establish criteria for evaluating the possible impacts associated with any proposed redevelopment, including payment in lieu of tax (PILOT) agreements, stresses on and required changes or additions to Hoboken’s infrastructure, and increased building height and density on the quality of life and on the property tax rates of Hoboken and other Hudson County residents.

Leave a Reply

172 Comments on "City Council – 3/4/2009"

gdstep
Member
gdstep

Are there actually people who think posts like Jolly Roger’s help Mason? I wasn’t a Mason supporter anyway, mainly because her supporters on here have turned me off. But people who used to support her on here are angry because they believe that Mason’s recent votes “sold out” the taxpayers as part of a political deal.

Changing the subject by calling Zimmer (whose voting record seems to be pure) and her supporters names doesn’t answer the question as to why Mason cast the votes she did.

jvsteiner
Member
jvsteiner

[quote comment=”141306″]Nice try Hola and Mike,

But your ridiculous spin doesn’t fly. You’re both Zimmertinis, the very people who are apologizing for the bad deeds of the HCDO and making it okay for Dawn to be the HCDO candidate.

So Mike, you don’t like how the HCDO is running this town? You shouldn’t, they have been running it into the ground for years, and Dawn the HCDO pawn will continue that tradition. But I guess you’re one of those people who refuses to accept the truth.

The one person the corrupt HCDO machine wants to keep out of the mayor’s seat is Mason and right now, both Zimmer and Cammarano are vying to be the HCDO’s top dog.

Adios, and have a fun day![/quote]
That’s funny, I thought the HDCO machine endorsed Roberts w/ Cammarano in the last election. This ridiculous attempt to associate Dawn with the HCDO and Cammarano is tissue thin lies. You’re going to have to come up with something less ridiculous to pass the laugh test on this blog.

hobokinen
Member
hobokinen
[quote comment=”141306″]…You’re both Zimmertinis, the very people who are apologizing for the bad deeds of the HCDO and making it okay for Dawn to be the HCDO candidate. So Mike, you don’t like how the HCDO is running this town? You shouldn’t, they have been running it into the ground for years, and Dawn the HCDO pawn will continue that tradition. But I guess you’re one of those people who refuses to accept the truth. The one person the corrupt HCDO machine wants to keep out of the mayor’s seat is Mason and right now, both Zimmer and Cammarano are vying to be the HCDO’s top…[/quote] JollyJoker, I was totally against Zimmer a few months ago, as I thought she’s too weak to even be considered for a mayoral position. But it took 2 council meetings and a Beth Mason secret meeting behind closed doors with the CT residents to see her dark side. Cammarano is the most disgusting kind of crook (and look who he is associating with – an idiot like Frances), so I hope honest voters see him for what he is, so we are left with one choice: Zimmer; unless a surprise candidate pops out of nowhere. At least Zimmer shows integrity. Are you kidding, this is the best you could come up with, blasting her for using the city email? How about Russo spending the city money to send us a Christmas card? How about all the city council members, except Zimmer & Cunningham, who… Read more »
HobokenReformer
Member
HobokenReformer
[quote comment=”141293″]Nothing says reform like Zimmer wanting to boot over 300 qualified affordable housing residents out of Church Towers. Had the council not approved the extension, CT would go to market rate. Zimmer’s excuse for supporting that is because she’s assuming the developer will renege on the affordable housing component (what? She wants to beat the developer to the punchline?), yet Zimmer herself has not created an alternative plan or made any provision to protect the affordable housing residents. So her solution is to sacrifice the whole (400) for the sake of 30 or so who make over 80k?[/quote] Dude, you are so far out in never-never land! 40% of the current CT tenants are paying the rent surcharge, which implies that they make more than $124,000 per year, and many of those MUCH MORE then that!!! 40% of 400 makes it 160(!) tenants who are leeching off of my tax dollars and just got a blank check by the city council to continue to do so for another 10 years! You have no clue what is going on, Jolly Roger! And by the way, it was not the city councils responsibility (and even less Dawn’s personal responsibility) to propose a new HUD (or other government) program. This was the obligation of the owners of CT, since they were the ones asking the city for a HUGE tax abatement for TEN YEARS! There are two groups who stand to benefit from this stupid decision by the city council, namely the… Read more »
uptown mike
Member
uptown mike

[quote comment=”141306″]Nice try Hola and Mike,

But your ridiculous spin doesn’t fly. You’re both Zimmertinis, the very people who are apologizing for the bad deeds of the HCDO and making it okay for Dawn to be the HCDO candidate.

So Mike, you don’t like how the HCDO is running this town? You shouldn’t, they have been running it into the ground for years, and Dawn the HCDO pawn will continue that tradition. But I guess you’re one of those people who refuses to accept the truth.

The one person the corrupt HCDO machine wants to keep out of the mayor’s seat is Mason and right now, both Zimmer and Cammarano are vying to be the HCDO’s top dog.

Adios, and have a fun day![/quote]
Adios? that’s the best you can do? it will adios and an old fashioned “see ya” to you and others profiting on the backs of honest, hard working people like my neighbors in town and me. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

wpDiscuz