City, MTOTSA find common ground

City, MTOTSA find common ground
Owners of three properties refuse to sign settlement
BY KENNY WALTER Staff Writer
After more than nine months of mediation, the city of Long Branch reached an agreement to preserve a beachfront neighborhood that all involved agreed is imperfect but, nonetheless, a workable compromise.

FILE PHOTOS MTOTSA activists Denise Hoagland (l) and daughter Violet sit on their porch with Lori Ann Vendetti in 2005.
All but six property owners in the MTOTSA (Marine and Ocean terraces and Seaview Avenue) neighborhood reached a settlement in their longstanding battle over the city's condemnation of their homes, which was formalized on Sept. 15 at the county Hall of Records in front of Superior Court Judge Thomas Cavanaugh Jr.

"I've always said that I wanted to keep the house and get eminent domain off the table. We had to fight, we weren't going to just give up the houses," said Lori Anne Vendetti, one of the MTOTSA residents who fought to save their homes from condemnation and who signed on to an agreement with the city that will permit her to keep her family home. She said the goal had been reached.

"We've had our ups and downs, but the goal was to keep our houses and live in peace without eminent domain," she added.

MTOTSA residents and their supporters held rallies to draw attention to their fight to save their homes from being taken by eminent domain.
Vendetti explained that the 16 owners of MTOTSA properties who signed the agreement didn't get everything they wanted.

"It's a settlement; obviously, you don't get everything you want," she said. "We wanted sidewalks and new curbs.

"I would have preferred eminent domain off the table citywide," she added.

Cavanaugh himself noted that the parties had come a long way since talks began in January.

"When I first got involved, there seemed to be some trepidation on the part of all concerned," Cavanaugh said, addressing those in the room. "There were very emotional feelings on the part of all parties.

"It didn't come easily," he added. "In the end, I think we have a product that everyone has found acceptable."

Long Branch Mayor Adam Schneider said the agreement was exactly that — a settlement.

"I'm glad it's resolved," he said after the session at the Hall of Records. "I think we moved steadily toward a resolution, but that doesn't mean it was easy.

"The property owners didn't have one point of view," he added. "The city didn't get everything it wanted, we had to compromise."

Denise Hoagland, one of the MTOTSA property owners who did not sign the agreement with the city, said she was doing so on moral grounds.

At a special City Council meeting later that evening, she explained her family's position.

"It is with a clear conscience that the Hoaglands did not agree to all terms of the settlement," she said while addressing the council.

"We strongly felt that in signing, we would be saying that what the city did was OK, and clearly it was and is not."

Nearly 20 MTOTSA residents as well as their attorneys showed up at the Hall or Records, where attorneys signed the consent order of settlement.

MTOTSA attorneys included Peter H. Wegener, of Bathgate Wegener and Wolf, Lakewood; Scott Bullock, senior attorney with the public interest law firm Institute for Justice, Arlington, Va.; and William J. Ward, of Carlin and Ward, Florham Park.

The city was represented by City Attorney James Aaron, Mayor Adam Schneider and Business Administrator Howard Woolley Jr. Also at the courthouse were attorneys for the developer MM-Beachfront North II, which was slated to redevelop the modest, three-street beachfront neighborhood as luxury condominiums.

MTOTSA is one of six zones slated for redevelopment and is located in the city's Beachfront North Phase II redevelopment zone. Also labeled as redevelopment zones are Beachfront South, Pier Village, Hotel Campus, Broadway-Gateway and Broadway-Corridor.

The settlement pre-empts a legal battle in which MTOTSA attorneys challenged the city's blight designation of the neighborhood, enabling the city to use eminent domain to take the homes.

The two sides were scheduled to meet in state Superior Court before Judge Lawrence Lawson, who scheduled the case to be heard in his courtroomJune 8 if negotiations between the two parties failed.

In June 2006, Lawson ruled in favor of the city's right to use eminent domain in MTOTSA, but attorneys for MTOTSA appealed the decision and the appellate court remanded the case back to Lawson to give the city the opportunity to expand the record in an attempt to prove that its redevelopment plan met the heightened blight standard.

Both MTOTSA and the city petitioned the state Supreme Court to hear the case, but the court denied both requests.

A few hours after the signing of the agreement, the City Council held a special meeting to adopt two resolutions authorizing the settlement order and amending the redevelopment agreement for the Beachfront North Phase II redevelopment zone.

One of the major sticking points in the settlement was the stipulation that residents who signed on agreed to waive their right to sue the city for compensatory damages.

In return, city officials agreed to take eminent domain off the table in the neighborhood and to allow property owners the right to improve their homes.

Also part of the 14-point deal is that the city will pay $435,000 in legal fees for MTOTSA; will have the developer demolish all boardedup houses in the neighborhood; and within two years will pave the roads and fix the lighting conditions in the area. Another benefit to the property owners is that they are now eligible for five-year tax abatements.

One point of contention that bothVendetti and Schneider said almost ended the talks were the 17 houses in the neighborhood that were acquired by the developer and boarded up. Those houses have been a haven for crime in recent months.

"We felt very strongly about it, and that was a non-negotiable point," Vendetti said. "We weren't going to budge on it; we felt it was making the neighborhood unsafe."

"That became a real issue of contention," Schneider said after the Hall of Records session. "That was probably as close as this came to being derailed."

Wegener summed up the settlement as simply the city's desire to free itself from possible litigation.

"Most of the defendants gave up their right to damages in order to facilitate the reconstruction of the neighborhood," he said. "It sounded like we're getting everything, so what's the city getting?

"Well the city is getting releases," he said.

Bullock explained that the six MTOTSA property owners who didn't sign on to the settlement are still able to improve their homes and not live under the threat of eminent domain. However, they are not eligible for tax abatements.

"I understand the reasons [for not signing]," he said. "I think it is more a matter of principle as opposed to being compensatory.

"They can decide what if any actions [they will take] in the future," he added.

At the special meeting that evening, Hoagland read a statement explaining her family's refusal to sign the agreement.

"For one, we are not developers, and we felt that if we agreed to becoming a developer for our property, then we would be accepting the term of blight for our property, which we do not.

"In this aspect, it is not a financial gain to receive the tax abatements for us, as we will not be redeveloping our property," she added.

Hoagland implied that the family may seek redress through litigation against the city.

"We also choose not to release the city of damages because we still strongly feel that what the mayor and council did was inherently wrong and had they listened to us eight years ago, personal suffering, financial loss to residents and the city would not have existed," she said.

"We are uncertain as to if we will act upon this action, but on moral grounds we could not commit to signing," she added.

Others criticized the settlement, among them Councilman Brian Unger, who voted via speakerphone not to approve the agreement.

"Since this measure will pass, there needs to be at least one symbolic 'no' vote as a … check on the errors and arrogance that led this administration to refuse to settle with MTOTSA six years and 2 [million] or 3 million dollars ago," Unger said.

"This was a shameless waste of taxpayer money," he added.

After the public discussion, Aaron addressed the meeting, explaining that the Beachfront North developer decided not to acquire more properties in the neighborhood, and the city was faced with a decision.

"The city had a choice where they could move forward with their own money without a redeveloper," he said. "The city decided they didn'twant to do that. The city also had a choice to abandon eminent domain and walk away and leave property owners where they were.

"The city in a good faith effort reached out to property owners nine months ago," he continued. "The city had to work in conjunction with the property owners to rezone this property."

Aaron answered criticism that the city has incurred high legal fees in its effort to take the homes in MTOTSA through eminent domain.

"No legal fees have been paid by the city for over a year and a half on this project," he said. "The $195,000 paid by the developers will pay the legal fees and professional fees that have been incurred by the city.

"In all of [Beachfront North], all the legal fees and design fees have been paid by the developers," he added.

With the settlement now signed, Vendetti, whose father, Carmen, died while negotiations were ongoing, said she has a sense of cautious optimism.

"Overall, I'm happy. I'm sad my father couldn't be around to see it," she said. "I'm still a little skeptical, not 100 percent trusting of our administration."

Contact Kenny Walter at

kwalter@gmnews.com.


Click here to enlarge



No Flash Detected
Please download the latest version by clicking below:

Get

Advertisement for Brock Farms