I am writing to you to request an immediate legislative investigation into the EnCap redevelopment matter in the Meadowlands of Bergen County. The EnCap debacle has reached a critical point in its evolution - a point at which only someone of your stature can be relied upon to unravel. I am respectfully asking you to make good on a pre-Election Day statement to investigate EnCap on behalf of the taxpayers of New Jersey.
As you know, this project has been mired in controversy for several years. There are grave concerns about the quality of the environmental work done to remediate the old landfills upon which homes and golf courses are to be built. There are published reports suggesting that state environmental officials were pressured to relax environmental standards for the developers.
Just as troubling, Senator, is the amount of public money that has been poured into this controversial project and the apparent lack of financial safeguards for taxpayers. As a councilman, I know firsthand how our taxpayers are suffering because of the overblown promises made by EnCap and the lack of third party review by the state, the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission or -- sadly - even local governments. Upwards of $300 million of taxpayer money is at risk and there has been little or no oversight from the state watchdogs who are supposed to be protect-ing taxpayers, but appear to be more concerned about protecting EnCap. Again, published reports indicate that state- backed loans and grants were made through the New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust and the Bergen County Improvement Authority over the objections of state officials who considered EnCap to be too risky of a proposition.
I believe, as I am sure you do, that EnCap must come under more scrutiny. In a published report in the Record newspaper on Sept. 22, 2007 you and Sen. Paul Sarlo agreed that taxpayer money needs to be protected and that a legislative investigation into EnCap is warranted. You and Sen. Sarlo said we would have to wait until after the leg-islative elections were completed to conduct that investigation. Senator, the elections are over and the EnCap picture is getting more clouded with the emergence of Donald Trump as a player in this drama. I believe it is indeed time for you -as one of the most powerful and respected members of the state legislature - to put the state’s investigative forces to work to protect the health and pocketbooks of the New Jersey residents.
Those who live in the Meadowlands not only need a legislative investigation, but we need you as the Senate President to call on Mary Jane Cooper to immediately release the findings of her 10 month long investigation into EnCap. And we need the Attorney General to look into the published allegations that EnCap benefited from political favoritism in Trenton.
The people of my community have lived under the thumb of EnCap for more than six years. We know all too well the political machinations that have allowed this boondoggle to fester and grow over the objections of local residents. Our concerns about this project are being proven correct with each new report about EnCap. I know you are a man of integrity who has the courage to look into the EnCap debacle and to make those responsible for this boondoggle accountable to the law and to the taxpayers. I pledge my full cooperation to you for any information you need for the legislative investigation.
Council President Steven A. Tanelli
Revelations about Donald Trump assuming control of the Encap debacle are good news for the communities of North Arlington, Lyndhurst and Rutherford.
The fallout of EnCap has been nothing short of a political disaster for elected officials who have struggled with the repercussions of a project that has raised property taxes at a horrendous pace.
The people of North Arlington may oppose EnCap, but they despise high taxes. This year's election results were a direct result of the sins of EnCap. Compound that with a lack of state aid and a fundamental shift in state dollars from direct aid to municipalities to property tax rebates, and this is the net effect of such a dubious course of action.
The public needs confidence and comfort in a developer it knows and, to some degree, trusts. The Trump brand cleanses the project of the EnCap label and begins the process of restoring some semblance of public confidence in something that never should have been allowed to spin out of control.
Let the lesson of EnCap be that state officials don't know what's best for local municipalities. The tail cannot wag the dog.
Al Granell
The choices in the race for North Arlington council are crystal clear and the best choice for voters is Councilman Philip Spanola and Councilman Mark Yampaglia.
In 2006, voters changed course by electing anti-EnCap, anti-eminent domain and anti-low income housing candidates in Mayor Peter Massa and his running mates Sal DiBlasi and Albert Granell. Since coming to office, incumbents Spanola and Yampaglia have supported Massa's efforts to void the EnCap agreement.
In clear contrast, the Republicans inexplicably support EnCap, despite the fact the entire project is unraveling before our eyes.
The EnCap proposal has become a boondoggle of the largest proportions. There is now bipartisan support for a complete investigation of this development travesty, yet Republicans Joe Bianchi and Richard Hughes think working with this controversial and unreliable developer is somehow still a goof idea.
Moreover, these local Republicans fail to address the simple fact that property taxes will rise this year because of the problems they created and Democrats inherited.
For 22 years, the Republicans ran North Arlington. They increased property taxes seven consecutive times. They squandered nearly $45 million dollars in temporary landfill fees and indebted the community to the tune of nearly $20 million. During this time, Bianchi and Hughes supported these fiscal policies without question, nor hesitation.
Spanola and Yampaglia are qualified and competent to serve as members of the borough's governing body. Both are college graduates. Both have lived in North Arlington nearly all of their lives.
Spanola has served as council president and acting mayor. He is a retired Jersey City police officer and former consumer fraud investigator. He has served as a member of the North Arlington Zoning Board, as well as serving as a member of the North Arlington Board of Education.
Yampaglia is a lifelong resident and law school graduate.
Meanwhile, Republicans want to urbanize North Arlington into an extension of Jersey City and Hudson County. Bianchi and Hughes want to foil Massa's plans to put North Arlington on the right track. They want to disrupt the unity and harmony that currently exists on the council with infighting and gridlock. They are committed to making sure Massa fails in his bid to stop EnCap now.
Let's keep North Arlington moving forward with the right team supporting the mayor. That team is Phil Spanola and Mark Yampaglia.
Ken Ludviksen, president, North Arlington Democratic Club
The Record's Columnist Mike Kelly's broadside on North Arlington's elected officials was aimed at the wrong target.
I have opposed the EnCap Golf Holdings agreement for years. I opposed the 2006 municipal budget that depended upon dollars from EnCap to balance our books because I knew it was an irresponsible ploy to give former Mayor Russell Pitman an election advantage.
In addition, I authored and sponsored the borough's vote on a proposal to block use of eminent domain for EnCap's benefit. The voters overwhelmingly supported that question, 4-1.
Kelly is right to be concerned about EnCap and the financial mess it has created. Unfortunately, he should be leveling his sights at the state and the legislators who backed this project from its inception. He should be probing the backroom deals that turned this project from a golf destination to a high-density, pie-in-the sky housing development.
We lobbied state government for emergency aid to get us through this difficult period. We were denied.
We don't want to raise taxes. But neither do we want to continue with financial gimmicks that will only dig us deeper in debt and delay the day of reckoning.
Newspaper columnists ask for elected officials to demonstrate political courage and tell the truth. We have done that in North Arlington. Now we are being criticized for doing the right thing. That's unfortunate.
Steve Tanelli
Regarding The Record's Columnist Mike Kelly's assumptions about North Arlington's budget process and battle with EnCap in "Apathetic N. Arlington voters accept tax increase":
The current Borough Council voided the EnCap Golf Holdings contract negotiated by our predecessors. It also stopped the use of eminent domain that would have allowed EnCap to acquire properties of people unwilling to sell. I can say with a great degree of confidence that this action prevented the random overdevelopment of North Arlington.
It is important to note this tax increase was no surprise. The voters have been kept in the loop with letters by Mayor Peter Massa, as well as a town meeting attended by nearly 500 residents May 1.
No elected official wants to raise taxes. North Arlington's revenue gap was caused directly by the negotiated agreement we voided. Those responsible for that course of action were removed by the voters last June in a Democratic primary battle.
Kelly has the right to an opinion about our finances and the battle with EnCap. He doesn't have the right to suggest this governing body somehow endorsed EnCap when facts clearly suggest the exact opposite.
Albert Granell
Residential development for the sake of development will not lead to North Arlington's remaining a small, suburban community ("Developers hope North Arlington will OK project with fewer units," Page L-3, Sept. 4).
Having served on the governing body for some 10 months, I believe one thing is absolutely certain: North Arlington homeowners reject more housing.
Morton Street Holdings has failed thus far to make the case for developing a site on Belleville Avenue with 42 residential units, a project in which this community has little or no interest. The issue isn't how much housing, but rather a general consensus that the community embraces non-housing alternatives that do not create strains on an already strained municipal budget.
Residential development is the most expensive form of ratable because of the municipal services it requires. The Belleville Avenue property is zoned for commercial use. That intent remains. No one in North Arlington is seeking to change the status of the property except the developers themselves.
If the developers have been watching with any real interest the battle with EnCap Golf Holdings, they already know another proposal for housing is the last thing North Arlington wants to consider.
Albert Grannell
The awkward and poorly managed supposition that hiring a public relations firm to level the playing field as it applies to North Arlington’s ongoing battle with EnCap did little to clarify the cost or the need (Town spends up to $44,000 a year for PR).
The inference that a $44,000 expenditure has anything to do with this year’s significant tax hike is simply uninformed.
More importantly, there remains a strong suggestion that North Arlington is being frivolous with tax dollars in the face of a tax crisis we inherited and did not create as a governing body.
Rather than analyze last year’s phony municipal tax decrease or the two-decade embedded fiscal policy of applying temporary host fees to an ever swelling municipal operation, continues to go untold. Tax hikes like the one we face this year has nothing to do with a $44,000 expenditure. It has everything to do with institutional deficit financing and the squandering of millions and millions in temporary landfill fees.
This is a classic example of some uninformed bureaucrat bending over for a proverbial penny while dollars continue to fly overhead.
Please, let’s just stop telling just a portion of the story.
North Arlington’s operating municipal budget is nearly $20 million. The amount of $44,000 represents about $120 a day in spending out of the some $54,794 a day it takes to operate this municipality. To put this expenditure into perspective, this contract represents 0.2 percent of all spending in this budget.
Given the actual cost, how can anyone suggest hiring a professional firm in the face of the EnCap media machine didn’t make sense?
What makes this issue all the more ironic, this paper’s sister publication (The Record of Hackensack) reported in April of this year that EnCap Holdings expended $1.6 million in lobbying assistance including a contract with Princeton Public Affairs, one of the state’s most politically influential lobbying firms. In addition, EnCap spent some $13 million in various professional services like a PR firm while securing hundreds of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds to push a project my community adamantly opposes.
Where is the outrage when it comes to EnCap’s purchased political influence and checkbook journalism tactics? How about the fact that EnCap has donated over $300,000 to various elected officials including $22,000 to local Republicans here in North Arlington? One can make the case that EnCap’s money is nothing more than tax dollars from the state of New Jersey.
How come these facts are never scrutinized?
EnCap Holdings purchased tens of thousands of dollars in newspaper advertising as well as cable ads. Can the South Bergenite truly be objective considering the fact this paper financially prospered by those media placements and expenditures promoting Arlington Valley?
EnCap Holdings according to the same investigative report has expended nearly $9 million in legal fees while North Arlington is facing fiscal catastrophe because of the lopsided agreement that my predecessors endorsed along with EnCap’s enablers in the state Legislature. How can any reasonable person not come to the conclusion that given the infinite resources of our adversary, that the hiring of an expert to defend our point of view was not a responsible investment in retaining the character of North Arlington?
While North Arlington was forced to beg for state assistance only to receive one third of its urgent request of $1.5 million, how does EnCap Holdings secure over $300 million in state awards and loans? While North Arlington and Rutherford only received a fraction of their state aid requests, EnCap now is teetering on default while North Arlington has been mired in litigation and lawsuits directly created by the EnCap fiasco.
Why was it that this state budget, some $33.5 billion in spending failed to fully fund extraordinary aid? In fiscal 2006 extraordinary aid was funded to the tune of $14.6 million. This year funding decreased some $9 million and assistance was limited to just 22 municipalities out of a possible 536 here in New Jersey.
As an elected official, I welcome public inquiries that seek to weed out waste and other inefficiencies. What I object is haphazard reporting that suggests a scenario far different than the political and fiscal reality North Arlington taxpayers have been subjected thanks to the incompetence of those who somehow thought shoving EnCap Holdings down the throat of homeowners was a good idea.
The hard reality is that North Arlington has gone it alone and continues to go it alone as it applies to the damage caused by EnCap. No one has come to our aid or assistance.
That’s a reality many conveniently ignore each and everyday.
Councilman Al Granell
To the Editor:
Should local government officials opposed to a project no one supports be held accountable for the actions of those no longer in office?
That is the question state officials should be asking themselves when they evaluate the merits of North Arlington’s plea for financial assistance from Trenton as it applies to our 2007 municipal budget.
As a councilman, I cannot be held accountable for the financial practices of the past that led to unbridled application of temporary host fees to articifically keep the municipal tax rate the same. This administration should not be held accountable for the deficit financing practices of the past that saw our long-term debt swell to unprecedented numbers despite the millions we continued to receive from landfill operations.
Because no one ever anticipated the day host fees would end and landfill operations would cease, North Arlington finds itself scrambling to get out of a bad agreement no one supports while trying to figure out just how to stabilize revenues without a severe tax hike that will impact every homeowner.
Mayor Massa has taken the bold step of voiding the current agreement, and the time to develop a plan the community can accept is first and foremost on my mind.
North Arlington’s application for state aid must be approved to avert such a financial disaster. I can’t think of a community more in need of state assistance given the circumstances surrounding our finances. This is not a political issue, but an issue of economic survival for thousands of seniors on fixed incomes who cannot afford a spike in the local tax levy.
Last year, the previous administration cut the tax rate on the premise a deal with EnCap would be approved. But now we learn otherwise. Only Mayor Peter Massa and Councilman Steve Tanelli had the foresight at the time to reject that budget and vote no. Since then, this governing body is united in preventing Arlington Valley while seeking responsible alternatives that do not include a random overdevelopment, eminent domain or low-income housing.
While our financial future rests in the hands of the state of New Jersey and the Governor’s office, we now learn that phase one conversion of Rutherford and Lyndhurst will now increase more than $70 million! The cost now to remediate these landfills is closing in on nearly $200 million, and some government agencies may claim the whole project in financial default based on these higher costs!
So if the developer in question can increase the cost of remediation some $70 million in which taxpayers will flip the bill, can Gov. Corzine and the legsislature see fit to approve a $750,000 in a one-time request for help here in North Arlington in a state budget that exceeds $33 billion in spending?
Can the state see fit to approve our application for Extraordinary Aid given the extraordinary and unforseen financial burden this project will have on all homeowners? Isn’t it obvious North Arlington’s financial condition has been in part created by the problems of this over ambitious project?
In 2005, then Sen. Jon Corzine came to North Arlington seeking to become our next governor. He campaigned door to door at the Ridge Park Apartments and worked closely with many of the elected officials here in the community who are feeling the pain of no financial assistance. The voters of North Arlington overwhelmingly supported Sen. Corzine, as well as Sen. Sarlo and Assembly members Schaer and Scalera.
The time has come for Gov. Corzine to come back to North Arlington and hear our plea for help. The problems we face today were inherited, not created by this governing body. I’m hopeful that those of us who fought so long to do the right thing will somehow not be penalized for circumstances far beyond our own control. In the end, the only thing that will accomplish is higher taxes that were supposed to be stabilized by property tax reform that can only happen thorugh direct financial assistance of the State of New Jersey.
Councilman Al Granell
Borough of North Arlington
State Sen. Paul Sarlo's decision to join us here in North Arlington to put a stop to the proposed EnCap project is welcome news .
The people of North Arlington have never embraced or endorsed this ill-conceived plan to squeeze 1,625 units of housing here in the borough without a clue as to the overall impact on roads, schools and other essential services.
The myth that North Arlington would be appropriately compensated has been smashed once and for all. Those who were duped into believing this project was in the borough's best interests failed either to read the agreement or understand the details of a proposal that is nothing more than a house of cards!
Even more to the point is the public's complete dissatisfaction with a proposal that mandates use of eminent domain seizure as well as the construction of low-income housing that is overwhelmingly opposed by the community. In short, there is nothing about EnCap or the proposal that benefits North Arlington in a positive fashion.
What is disturbing to me as a homeowner and elected official is the way we've been treated as a governing body and community. For months we have had no contact from this developer except in the way of lawsuits and litigation.
As a resident of North Arlington, I am proud of the fight we have waged despite the initial opposition from all levels of government that should have been protecting North Arlington versus enabling a project no one ever wanted in the first place.
Steve Tanelli
North Arlington Councilman
Did anyone read the Leader Editorial published on 2/8/07 “When it comes to EnCap, just give us the facts?”
I usually look forward to their editorials, often finding myself in agreement, or at least appreciate reading another viewpoint. However, this one turned out to be just a bunch of sour grapes (and I think) a heavy dose of false hope!
I was surprised that the Leader condemned the actions of a major newspaper’s reporting staff for having researched EnCap’s wheelings and dealings, and bringing their findings to the public’s eye. I would have thought the Leader would applaud such actions!
Many in the three affected communities have been concerned about how the PILOT would be paid; we worried why there was such a push to add more and more housing. The Bergen Record is showing us WHY!
I know for a fact that Mr. Pillets and his associates have been involved in researching EnCap’s dealings for well over a year. I don’t know if they knew when they started they would expose how the developer was planning to fleece New Jersey’s taxpayers, but that’s the path it’s taken. Therefore, suggesting that the Bergen Record’s efforts is little more than a “what if scenario” was both mean-spirited and unprofessional, as is the suggestion that the Leader Newspaper could not answers to their phone calls!
While the Leader’s editorial included vague references such as “there’s a project in Newark” and “another project in Edgewater” – they seem to present a performance surety underwritten by AIG (for the $211M in bonding by the NJEIT) as a sort of Holy Grail complete with the quote “as answers come in, you’ll see articles in the Leader.”
Hasn’t the Leader noticed that the cost of the project now hovers between $750M and $950M? Didn’t the Leader think that maybe the $211M was already identified as an amount that is at least backed by insurance? Didn’t the Leader’s Editor think that other major insurers might have checked to see if EnCap (or its parent company or subsidiaries) was seeking to cover additional large amounts?
Further, while a small-town-newspaper can afford to make vague references, it doesn’t appear that the Bergen Record has had that same luxury. Their articles are complete with quotes from a myriad of state officials and leading lawmakers from BOTH political parties.
I was particularly disappointed in how the Leader Editor concluded their editorial stating, “The EnCap deals that are in place with Lyndhurst and Rutherford still appear to protect the local taxpayers even if something is amiss at the state level, or if the entire project tanks” ……Are we to believe this is true because the $211M from the NJEIT (known of since 2005) is backed by AIG?
Kerry Ann Gennace
North Arlington
Thank you for taking a tough stand on the lack of oversight the state of New Jersey provides when it comes to out-of-control development proposals like EnCap ("An uncapped comptroller: Meadowlands cries out for a state watchdog," Editorial, Jan. 30).
For seven years we have heard nothing but corporate spin from this developer backed by political cheerleading from the New Jersey Meadowlands Commission, the Legislature and many other bureaucrats and elected officials who failed to protect the municipalities of Lyndhurst, Rutherford and North Arlington.
There is something terribly wrong with a process that allows one developer to purchase nearly 800 acres of property for less than $24,000 per acre. There is something terribly disturbing about a process that has state officials and state agencies behaving like an extension of the developer's marketing efforts, which has led us to the place we find ourselves today.
North Arlington is against this project and has made the tough decisions to prevent taxpayers from being ripped off by a proposal nobody supports. Our actions find ourselves in a lawsuit to protect taxpayers and homeowners. We are protecting the integrity of our land assessments, not bending to the developer's unreasonable and ridiculous claims that these parcels somehow lack value.
Governor Corzine, the NJMC and the Legislature need to take the necessary steps to protect the public.
Steve Tanelli
Rocky road for North Arlington homeowners
"it is because Pitman lacked the ability to govern that he frantically scrambled for this deal with EnCap"
It’s important to distinguish the truth from rhetoric as it applies to the suit recently filed by EnCap against North Arlington (Cherokee Porete takes North Arlington to court).
Former Mayor Russ Pitman’s description of North Arlington as a “customer” of EnCap is truly strange and disturbing.
Wasn’t there a time when the customer was always right?
If North Arlington was truly a customer of EnCap, wouldn’t this developer reveal the price they paid for the BCUA Transfer Station or drop the multiple law suits as they apply to tax appeals and forced usage of eminent domain seizure against the Porete Avenue business community? When did this customer ever have a say in this lopsided agreement?
I welcome this lawsuit because people like Pitman will be required to state his role in these negotiations and how we went from golf courses to 1,625 units of housing and hundreds of units of low-income housing as required in this agreement engineered by the ex-mayor and his borough attorney.
Ironically, it is because Pitman lacked the ability to govern that he frantically scrambled for this deal with EnCap. His inability to cut costs, negotiate collective bargaining agreements or say no to more spending is the very reason he was forced to make a deal so bad that finds us in today’s financial predicament.
Because Pitman failed to govern, because he avoided the tough issues of taxes and spending, EnCap received a deal so lopsided that those of us prepared to govern must first clean the mess of those rejected by the public.
I accept this burden. My job will not be easy. Pitman’s agreement with EnCap ensures a rocky road for North Arlington homeowners. North Arlington is not a customer of EnCap, but a hostage in an agreement so bad our future depends on getting out of it and starting anew.
Let the record state that no one from EnCap has ever contacted me during my time as a councilman or as mayor. Not a call. Not a letter. Only a lawsuit seeking to compel our community into something nobody wants. When will EnCap acknowledge that reality?
Mayor Pete Massa, North Arlington
Redevelopment Area Bonds
I’ve been doing a lot of research about RABs (Redevelopment Area Bonds) the means Encap reportedly would use to finance their PILOT Program. RABs have been described as a” relatively new financial tool” and that’s an understatement!
Fact is, RABs have only been used once in New Jersey! The solitary experience being to finance the PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) for the renovation of a single building in Newark, New Jersey!
The EDA (New Jersey Economic Development Authority) used RABs to finance the $7.9M needed to transform Newark’s “Eleven80” from a vacant office building to a luxury apartment complex! So, while since 1974 the EDA has funded $1.69 billion to finance 477 urban renewal projects in Newark, they only elected to use RABs this one time, for the renovation of “Eleven80”.
The Long-Term Tax Exemption Law (N.J.S.A. 40A:20-1) was amended in 2002 to include RAB bonding, with RABs being designed to allow PILOTs to be structured to match debt service.
The purpose of RAB financing was to allow towns in need of infrastructure improvements and also land acquisition and demolition. For example, had North Arlington not sold off its water system, it could have applied for RAB financing to facilitate up-grades, pointing to the fact that improvements were needed to ready the system for the eventual development beyond its easterly borders.
Concerning Encap….this developer would make PILOT payments to the town on the value of improvements to the property, enabled by a tax abatement on the property for those improvements. The town would then pass along the payments to a “trustee”, which uses these PILOTS to make the debt-service payments on the bonds. So, while I have read the assurances that the host communities would be insulated form any financial risk, it seems very clear that the towns are pivotal in not only acquiring these RABs, but active in dispensing the RAB debt service! Therefore, I’m not sold (nor is the state apparently!) that there is no risk!
Also, I just don’t see how remediation of hundreds of acres of landfill in comparable to converting a single office building into a luxury apartment complex! While it is very reasonable to anticipate folks wanting to purchase/lease a luxury dwelling adjacent to Newark’s Military Park, there’s really NO GUARANTEE whatsoever that folks will be clamoring to buy homes built upon remediated landfills.
I’m glad the state is looking at Encap’s financing method and the risk it could present to the three host communities. I think ultimately a different financing formula will be required, and the RAB approach be reserved for less speculative ventures (like building renovation and financing urban renewal projects) not landfill remediation and the creation of urban sprawl.
Kerry Ann Gennace, North Arlington
The Corzine administration is to be commended for putting responsible governance ahead of politics as usual when it comes to the pay-to-play environment surrounding New Jersey's redevelopment process.
The governor needs to take drastic action and implement the findings of the public advocate as it applies to development and eminent domain. He must install the necessary protections to ensure that homeowners and municipalities do not become the pawns of greedy developers.
I'm embarrassed by a process that is nothing more than an insider's game controlled by the powerful and politically well-connected. The people simply have no say about the future when it comes to EnCap and the consequences of moving forward with such a risky proposition.
State bureaucrats and neighboring mayors met to discuss Phase I financing of the project. I did not attend because North Arlington is not part of that application. But more important, why would I tacitly endorse this controversial project when the developer is now suing my community and demanding we exercise eminent domain seizure to construct hundreds of units of low-income housing this borough does not want?
What these people don't seem to understand is that 80 percent of North Arlington voters endorsed vast restrictions on eminent domain. The people have spoken. I intend to keep my promises to the people. They are my employer, not the bureaucrats, politicians and developers who could care less about the urbanization of North Arlington.
Peter Massa
As a North Arlington councilman, I’m interested in the opinions of the Leader Newspapers and how these opinions shape public opinion.
In the case of EnCap, I feel some clarity is in order.
Thoughtful discussion on how to proceed in terms of future development here in the South Bergen region is a discussion that deserves balanced reporting since the very future of Rutherford, Lyndhurst and North Arlington hangs in the balance. I appreciate the opportunity afforded me here to express my views and the sentiment of many North Arlington homeowners as it applies specifically to the proposed Arlington Valley project.
But because EnCap was designated by state officials and not the local municipalities to redevelop these parcels, the financing of such a massive proposal must be scrutinized and must be credible.
As The Leader stated last week, just how did this project morph from golf course living to housing construction? I don’t recall when it became 4,000 units of new housing. How did we get from living on the links to eminent domain seizure and low income housing?
I believe at the heart of this controversy is the lack of transparency as to the intent of EnCap and how this project has transformed itself and how it will fast track these small communities into urbanized, mini-cities!
As a public official, taxpayer and parent, I believe that development can be positive for a community.
The question before us now is does the plan(s) as presented to these communities have the public support necessary to move forward? Does the present economic environment lend to the construction of 4,000 units of housing or some 10,000 additional residents for North Arlington, Lyndhurst and Rutherford?
More specifically, what is the benefit for those already living in Rutherford, Lyndhurst and North Arlington?
Will property taxes stabilize or decrease? Will schools become overcrowded and cost more to operate? Will local roads be able to absorb literally thousands of new cars each and every day?
These basic concerns remain for the most part, unanswered.
As The Leader accurately states, EnCap is not the developer. But EnCap has engineered this development project. They have formulated the need for additional housing few seem to endorse nor want.
The public’s access to the policy formulation process has been nearly non-existent.
And now state officials are questioning the very premise of the EnCap application.
What other private developer has been able to extract $142 million in low-cost loans and then go back to the state and request another $366 million in new financing?
Why would the state of New Jersey accept such financing terms without credible public scrutiny?
The gamble here is that homebuyers will purchase properties on remediated landfills for nearly $1 million? Where is the credible evidence such a purchase is realistic given the downturn in residential housing?
What is the net result of a bust housing market and the EnCap project?
I agree with The Leader that the financing as presented is neither simple and nearly impossible to understand. That in itself is cause for concern. That in itself raises red flags that must be considered.
The problem with EnCap is not in the questions, the problem is that questions are never answered. For years these questions have remained on the table without a reply. Dozens of public officials and private citizens have asked these same questions time and time again on these very pages without any answers from the folks at EnCap.
For North Arlington did not pick EnCap. North Arlington was thrusted into negotiations with this developer because of a regional policy directive promoted by the NJMC. May I remind your readers that no one at the NJMC was elected by anyone, yet those of us accountable to the voters continue to bear the brunt of unanswered questions and the very credibility of the project as it effects these three communities.
Why hasn’t EnCap held a single regional meeting on this project? Why hasn’t EnCap addressed any of these financial issues as well as held public forums to defend the financing as presented? Why doesn’t their Web site even mention any of the issues brought forth by Director Jacobucci as it applies to Rutherford and Lyndhurst?
While Director Jacobucci’s concerns remain legitimate and on the table for discussion, EnCap remains silent.
Not only does EnCap remain silent, but they now have begun the process of suing North Arlington because we won’t condemn dozens of thriving companies who offer good paying jobs to hundreds of area residents. These companies pay over $1 million in taxes and have minimal impact on essential services.
How can you claim to be a partner to North Arlington when you’re seeking reduced property assessments and demanding North Arlington to seize condemn the property of neighbors and friends?
At the end of the day, the developer agreement with North Arlington is a lopsided deal that does not protect homeowners. It will not stabilize taxes. It will increase the cost of local government while losing our small-town character and charm.
I urge The Leader to consider these central themes and arguments as the debate over responsible development continues here in the South Bergen communities of Lyndhurst, Rutherford and North Arlington.
Councilman Steve Tanelli
Now that the Corzine administration has gone on record opposing the controversial financing methods as it pertains to the embattled EnCap housing project, when will the state realize this proposal is just bad public policy?
I'm encouraged that Governor Corzine has become a forceful voice for development reform. I hope that position will extend to details of a plan few in North Arlington want or support.
The developer of this poorly planned project that lacks any semblance of public support, EnCap, is now suing North Arlington because of those of us who had the temerity to challenge the whole concept as nothing more than the complete urbanization of South Bergen.
This lawsuit only confirms that EnCap is not a friend to North Arlington. I welcome it because we will finally find out who is responsible for a deal so bad that North Arlington voters are simply exhausted in expressing their absolute discontent with EnCap and those who continue to support this public policy tragedy.
Al Granell
I have been actively opposed to the EnCap project for several years now and believe that the financing structure is so tenuous and questionable that it will likely lead to collapse. Such a collapse would result in a New Jersey equivalent of the Teapot Dome scandal.
To collect any money from Bergen County through the bonding process, Gauger must form an urban enterprise limited liability company as well as a host of other corporate entities to structure this complicated transaction. The truth is that there is a web of corporations, LLCs and other entities all designed to maximize EnCap's financial position and to shield the company's officers and its parent, Cherokee Investment Partners of North Carolina, from liability.
EnCap doesn't qualify under the urban renewal statute. First of all, it registered as such with the secretary of state in March 2006, years after the initial deal had been signed. Second, it is questionable as to whether EnCap would qualify as an urban renewal project under the statute. If a court were to rule that EnCap couldn't use the urban renewal designation, the delicate financing house of cards that has been constructed to fund this project would fall down.
Gauger's statements about the liability to the local municipalities are, at best, oversimplified. The $450 million cost in payment-in-lieu-of-taxes bonds does not include $30 million a year in debt service. That's another $900 million over the 30-year repayment period -- $600 million for Lyndhurst and $300 million for Rutherford. According to the present estimates the project will not generate the amount of money necessary to cover this massive debt.
Then there is the issue of EnCap and pay-to-play. It would take volumes to list with any degree of thoroughness the amount of pay-to-play that has surrounded this project. EnCap has systematically used pay-to-play money to place the burden of this project on the taxpayer.
Michael A. Guarino
To the Editor:
Recent revelations uncovered by investigative reports conducted by a local daily paper, as well as the questions posed by Director Susan Jacobucci as chair of the state’s Local Finance Board, call into question the viability of the EnCap proposal to move forward.
For years, those of us who questioned the rationale, size and scope of the project were ignored or shuttled aside as troublesome pests who simply wanted transparency and guarantees that the homeowners of South Bergen would be protected by this developer.
For years, I have watched appointed state bureaucrats and others tell each other what a wonderful project this will become. But the details always remained murky. The protections we pleaded for were never hammered out. In the end, state government enabled a project nobody supports over the concerns of the municipalities most effected by this debacle in the making!
Finally, Director Jacobucci’s questions as to the actual viability of this financial arrangement have been called into question, and these questions deserve immediate answers from those who have heaped praise upon a project that has created more questions than answers. A project that lacks any serious public support while avoiding legitimate scrutiny and oversight by those charged to protect the public interest.
Myself, along with Councilman Tanelli and incoming council members Al Granell and Sal DiBlasi, made opposition to EnCap, eminent domain seizure and the construction of low-income housing the cornerstone of our municipal campaign. We refused to buy into the corporate rhetoric that EnCap was the solution to all of our problems. That this out-of-state developer would somehow fix the ills of the past and transform North Arlington into some golf destination resort.
That rhetoric just isn’t true.
I believe that EnCap is nothing more than a massive housing project under the guise of marketing a public and private golf course. I think this project will swell traffic, public school enrollment, and in the end, cost North Arlington millions in infrastructure costs while the developer walks away with 40 percent of the revenue.
Hardly a deal worth bragging about.
More importantly, I believe it will raise taxes while urbanizing North Arlington into an extension of Hudson County. The current deal gives the developer the opportunity to increase the number of units to over 2,000, and in the end, is nothing more than a headache for homeowners who will gain nothing from a project nobody supports.
In the end, developers just want to make money, and they really don’t care about the impact or consequences left to the municipality. I think those charged to protect the interest of South Bergen have slept at the switch, and now sadly, the chickens are coming home to roost.
The first responsibility of any government is to protect the citizenry. But when it comes to EnCap, I believe state government has ignored public sentiment, steam rolled over home-rule and laughed in the face of the exhausted homeowner who will live with the results of this development nightmare.
That is the tragedy of this situation.
MayorPete Massa
Borough of North Arlington
Why is the voice of the people being ignored?
To the Editor:
The recent revelations as to the financial condition of EnCap only confirms my belief this agreement must be voided.
According to published reports, the developer is now seeking $366 million to jumpstart this fledgling development few people want or support.
With the exception of some non-elected bureaucrats who seem determined to support this project no matter what the consequences, EnCap has failed miserably in making the case for transforming the South Bergen communities of North Arlington, Lyndhurst and Rutherford into mini-cities incapable of providing the services necessary to accommodate thousands and thousands of new residents, additional school-age children and the thousands of cars that will descend upon these municipalities in the form of additional traffic that will choke Route 3, Ridge Road and Schuyler Avenue.
Here in North Arlington, EnCap has insisted in invoking eminent domain condemnation and seizure despite the fact hundreds of jobs would be lost and the lives of dozens of Porete Avenue businessmen would be turned upside down.
But despite all the problems and challenges of this dubious folly, county and state officials seem determined to enable a project nobody wants!
Why is the voice of the people being ignored?
Now we find out that the state’s Local Finance Board is questioning the exposure to Lyndhurst and Rutherford and the whole financial viability of the project.
Does one need any additional information to understand that the brakes need to be put on EnCap right now?
As a member of the North Arlington governing body, I intend to vigorously scrutinize this plan negotiated by others who are no longer part of this council. It is this very agreement and the way it was negotiated that led to their political demise.
It is pretty obvious now, given this additional information, that EnCap is not only a terrible deal for North Arlington, but a huge financial risk that in the end will raise property taxes.
The time has come for the truth and some transparency when it comes to this project. When will the developer along with the NJMC and other state officials admit that simple reality?
Councilman-elect Al Granell
North Arlington
Why does Bianchi call himself ‘Councilman-elect’?
To the Editor:
I noticed that Republican council candidate Bianchi has already decided he has won the election by identifying himself as “councilman-elect.”
I didn’t realize the election was canceled and he was declared the winner!
I guess I should stop campaigning and just stop by the shop and congratulate Mr. Bianchi on a job well done.
I urge Mr. Bianchi to join me door-to-door and hear the concerns of senior citizens and other homeowners who are frightened by the proposition of eminent domain seizure and the construction of 1,625 units of housing coupled with 300 units of low-income units he supports.
In this carefully worded victory lap, Mr. Bianchi fails to state if he would use eminent domain seizure to condemn the Porete Avenue business community. I found it odd Mr. Bianchi had nothing to say at the last council meeting as to his position on eminent domain or his lack of support for the ballot initiative that will vastly restrict this process here in North Arlington.
Maybe if Mr. Bianchi and the Republicans spent less time replicating phony tax bills to use as campaign literature, they would take the time to clarify their position as it relates to EnCap, eminent domain seizure and the construction of low-income housing.
While Mr. Bianchi seems to brush aside the real threat of eminent domain seizure, it only proves just how out of touch he is with the residents of North Arlington.
Mr. Bianchi has served in government for nearly two decades in various capacities. I’ve always known him to be a Pitman supporter, and Pitman has endorsed his campaign.
I believe he has had countless opportunities to take a clear position on the issue of EnCap, but continues to avoid the issue.
Why is that?
While the self proclaimed councilman-elect calls for additional police officers and other increases in the size of local government with no explanation or justification, it would be nice to tell taxpayers just how much it will cost for patrol cars, motorcycles and added staffing.
Too bad councilman-elect Bianchi has refused to debate such important matters.
It’s been a pleasure going door-to-door and meeting the people of North Arlington. I understand your concerns about EnCap and why this is the most important issue to face this community in decades.
For whatever reason, Mr. Bianchi believes that his position on EnCap, eminent domain seizure and low-income housing should remain a mystery since he’s apparently already won.
That’s too bad.
Know this about myself, Pete Massa and Sal DiBlasi. We don’t assume anyone’s vote or support.
We want to earn your trust and confidence.
Something I don’t think Mr. Bianchi seems to understand.
Al Granell
Candidate for Council
North Arlington
An open letter to Republican candidate Peter Norcia
To the Editor:
Campaigns for public office generally set the tone for how one would govern if successful.
Peter Norcia, the former Lyndhurst resident and failed candidate for commissioner, is running a campaign that I don’t think addresses the core issues facing taxpayers: random development, EnCap, eminent domain seizure and the construction of low-income housing.
How can an individual be taken seriously when one refuses to acknowledge the inherent dangers of supporting the EnCap/Pitman agreement?
I organized real opposition to EnCap back in March and contacted U.S. Attorney Chris Christie to evaluate the EnCap debacle.
The current plan as I understand it hands over 40 percent of all tax revenues to the developer.
At the last council meeting, I helped kill an ordinance that would have imposed eminent domain seizure upon the borough. Mr. Bocchino and Mr. Bianchi won’t even take a stand on the upcoming referendum to vastly restrict eminent domain seizure.
To me, it seems obvious they support EnCap and not the Porete Avenue business community.
I have lived in North Arlington all of my life. I was raised here. My parents still live here. My children were raised here. My wife and I are homeowners for nearly four decades. I didn’t move to North Arlington to try to jump-start a failed political career. I’m a lifetime law enforcement official, having served at the local, county and state level. My current position allows me the opportunity to fight organized crime and protect our ports.
Public service to me is a way of life.
I want North Arlington to remain a small, suburban community and all that it has to offer in terms of value, location and services.
I will not back down to out-of-state developers and sell out North Arlington property. I have been consistent and concise in my opposition to EnCap, eminent domain and low-income housing during my whole tenure on the governing body.
Mr. Norcia, I will meet you anytime, anywhere to debate the issues for all to compare and contrast.
The people of North Arlington are exhausted by the behavior of a campaign that has no regard for the truth. The people of North Arlington solidly endorse my opposition to EnCap. I earned my way on this ballot.
It’s time to stop hiding and start answering some basic questions. The people know where I stand. Phony tax bills, distasteful flyers and other lies just won’t cut it. Stand next to me side by side so the people can make an informed choice.
Your silence has become deafening.
Councilman Peter Massa
Candidate for Mayor
North Arlington
Phony Tax flyer upsets North Arlington Community
To the Editor:
North Arlington residents were recently what I consider to be victimized by a tasteless political flyer sent in the disguise of a final tax bill. The envelope looked like an official borough mailing, complete with a Property Tax label and a red PAST DUE “stamp” on it. Enclosed was a document that was titled 2006 FINAL TAX BILL — a very close resemblance to the real thing.
What turned out to be political propaganda, prompted an outcry from confused residents who called borough hall looking for answers. Where did this phony “tax bill” originate? After reading the back of the letter, it was not difficult to figure where it had originated.
I attended the Oct. 19 borough council meeting, with the intention of asking Mayor Pitman if he was aware of the letter. However, he was not in attendance. I, then, directed my question to council President Spanola, who was chairing the meeting. Mr. Spanola responded he didn’t know but confirmed that the letter created a great deal of concern among residents.
Since no one could answer my question, I turned to Mr. Norcia, who was at the meeting, and asked him if he would explain how he came in possession of this document. He declined to answer directly and responded, “Address your questions to the chair.”
Mr. Spanola responded that he would have the situation looked into. The borough attorney advised that tax bills can be obtained via OPRA [Open Public Records Act]. I asked how a blank tax bill with the borough’s information can make it out of town hall and into the hands of candidates running for office, especially those who do not currently hold an elected position.
George McDermott
North Arlington
Disturbing notice of tax increases if Massa wins election
Dear Editor:
It is very disturbing that Norcia, Bocchino & Bianchi are sending out letters to taxpayers that say "past due" and stating that under Massa, DiBlasi and Granell our property taxes would increase $515.62 per quarter.
My husband went to the Tax Department today, October 19th, to report this and was told some people already went in to pay their taxes because of this "Past Due" that appeared on the front of the mailing envelope.
Something has to be done to stop this scare tactic and I suggest you print this in your next issue.
Sincerely,
Ruth Hughes
Editor's Note: We agree 100% Ruth!
Dear Editor:
This letter is in response to Mr. Norcia’s letter to the editor posted in the local papers starting on September 20, 2006.
One of the comments posted in that letter stated that Mr. Massa voted for the ENCAP agreement then voted against it was the same comment made by the current mayor at previous council meetings. He continued to state that Mr. Massa, along with Mayor Pitman, hasn’t been truthful with taxpayers. Was Mr. Norcia forgetting that members of his ticket have been witnessed meeting with the Mayor and his circle, on more than one occasion, in such places as his campaign headquarters on primary lection day as well as local diners in the area?
What reason did they have for these meetings? Along with a recent public endorsement of the Republican ticket, it appears we have the outgoing Mayor meeting with the Republican candidates on a regular basis and exchanging information which they, as current candidates, may not even be entitled too.
The Republican ticket and current Mayor continue to point out that Mr. Massa along with Mr. Tanelli voted in favor of the MOA last April.
That vote only gave permission for continued research and studies under the due diligence process. No where in the MOA did it state they were voting to allow the ENCAP project to proceed. On the contrary, they both voted against the agreement because due diligence was not completed and the terms of the agreement benefited the developer far more than the residents and community of North Arlington. The continued meetings and subsequent endorsement by Mayor Pitman only shows that Mr. Norcia and his ticket support that overdevelopment, overcrowding the schools and eminent domain be rammed down the throats of all North Arlington residents and business owners.
George McDermott
The writer is a member of the North Arlington Board of Education and a former candidate for Borough Council.
Dear Editor:
I'm glad to say that after living in NA for almost 10 years and being a homeowner for the past 4 we've sold our two-family house and got out of this place just in time.
Councilman Pat Roche is right, it is the armpit of Bergen County, that is run by complete incompetence, and no matter who is in office!
They just want to take advantage of the taxpayers. I mean look at the state of affairs, $25 million in debt, constantly increasing the school budget, just to cover operating expenses while the kids just keep getting more and more stupid and fail miserably!
Residents like our former neighbors who let their filthy dogs crap all over the front lawn with little kids around and don't bother to clean up for weeks at a time! A police force who although the chief truly tried to be helpful really don't care about the town, and just want to collect their bloated paychecks. A Building Department that has no teeth and can't force a dump of a house to clean up its act or fine the owner of the house, who inherited it and let the house go to crap!
And yes this is the exact reason why we left, two well educated professionals that earn 4 times the average household income in NA, who spent tens of thousands of dollars renovating a beautiful house only to have it marred literally cost us $45,000 in our price reduction.
If NA thinks they are going to make, they are sorely mistaken. Driving out people like us (well educated, parishoners of QP, helpful and caring of our neighbors - the good ones) means only one thing for NA - You'll soon look like Newark, and you have no one else to blame but yourself. NA should be ashamed of itself for allowing its affairs to get completely out of control. It's a dying town literally!
I hope Councilman Massa and Councilman Tanelli can turn the tide in this town, because you are all about to be soaked!
Goodbye and good riddens!!!!
A very happy former NA home owner!
Editor's note: The above letter was edited due to length.
Editor:
On June 6, voters in North Arlington will determine our borough’s future. I welcome the opportunity to walk door-to-door, reminding our friends and neighbors of the challenge we face in the form of EnCap, eminent domain and the random development of this community. Unfortunately, Mayor Pitman hides and avoids my calls for a debate.
His version of leadership begins at the end of the line.
This proposal supported by Mayor Pitman will construct at least 1,625 units of housing, of which 200 units will be dedicated to low income housing. Because of the massive loopholes in this sweetheart package, EnCap could build as many as 2,000 units and waive all height restrictions negotiated in the contract. This proposal will increase passenger traffic by at least 3,000 cars in the Belleville Pike, Schuyler Avenue entrance. It will cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in school construction costs as well as more employees, an additional police station and new firehouse.
The price tag attached to this project is conservatively $75 million upon build out. This proposal will increase our population and urbanize North Arlington into a small city increasing crime and the other problems that come with any overpopulated venue. I know. I’m a career law enforcement official. I served this community for three decades as a police officer. I know that a population explosion Pitman supports will demand more cops and another police station. To keep North Arlington safe, millions will need to be invested in our public safety expenditure.
But despite the obstacles, we can defeat EnCap and Pitman.
No developer will dare move forward without some semblance of community support. June 6th is the one day, the one opportunity, to reject Pitman’s scheme to double the size of this community and impose low income housing and eminent domain on hard working citizens like Sal DiBlasi.
Both of my running mates understand the fear of eminent domain. Al Granell’s Ridge Road residence is at risk as well as Sal’s company Cobra Construction located on Porete Avenue. How would you feel if someone wanted to take your home or business? Would you be able to sleep nights? What effect would this have on your family and your future?
Four years ago we believed Pitman
