No Movement On United Water Rezoning Study

Mayor & Council discuss option of going forward with rezoning study and give their opinion on what they would like to see on that property.

Mayor Ann Subrizi informally polled the council for their opinion on whether or not to move forward with the examining the option of less intensive use of the and asked each member their vision of what they would like to see on the property. 

Disscussion ensued, but no formal vote was taken. 

Subrizi said that she wished that United Water never decided to sell the property, "(United Water) blames overdevelopment for flooding and then they go and sell to a developer." 

"I want nothing or I want the least possible something," Subrizi said, adding that she did not want to say anything that might jeopardize the town and preclude her from hearing the application should it come before the mayor and council. 

Councilwoman Hedy Grant said that although she is concerned about overdevelopment, she does not have a specific concrete view of what she envisions on that property if rezoned for less intensive use.

"I would like to see something far less intrusive," Grant said.  

She added that there are only two reasons why the mayor and council might consider rezoning the property for a less intensive use:

  1. If an agreement is reached with the developer that everyone can agree on and the current application is withdrawn, or
  2. To have something in place should the application be denied.

"Other than (those two reasons) I see no reason to rezone," Grant said.

"I would like us to review if there’s a possiblity to purchase the property; if something wasn't done properly when it was sold," she added, suggesting the possibility of discovering a loophole in the sale.  

Councilman Diego Robalino agreed with Grant, but said that the purpose of moving forward with the rezoning study would be to "put the brakes" on what can go there because if the zoning board denies the application, and the mayor and council deny it, it will most likely be appealed to Superior Court in Hackensack and a superior court judge will give their recommendation on what should be developed on that property.

Councilman Dominic Colucci said that if the council moves on the rezoning study, then the will have to be relocated.  

Councilwoman Randi Duffie said, "I would need to know why I’m doing (rezoning)." She questioned whether they would be doing it to park COAH somewhere else, or to make a "big ugly application smaller."

Duffie asked Borough Attorney Mark Madaio if the borough found money to purchase the property, could they still do so.

Madaio explained that if funding became available, the borough could attempt to purchase the property, but stressed that because the property is currently in the middle of a private sale, they would have to tread carefully in order not to interfere with the current buyer and seller's contractual rights. 

During the course of the discussion, Grant asked Subrizi when she was approached by United Water to purchase the property in an effort to establish a timeline of when the town was given the right of first refusal. 

"I understand public utilities must give an offer of first refusal to a town before going through with a private sale," Grant said.

Subrizi responded that over six years ago, as United Water was remediating the property, the governing body was approached about a potential purchase. She said that at that time the governing body did not know if the property was going to be fully remediated, and said that off the top of her head she did not have the exact timeline on the order of events. (The Borough Administrator will provide the timeline at the next public meeting of the mayor and council.)

When questioned by the public, Subrizi stressed that the Riverkeeper did not offer the borough any financial assistance towards the purchase of the United Water property.

Subrizi said that the conversation she had with the Riverkeeper was an "off the record phone conversation" and did not feel comfortable publicly sharing it. However, she assured the audience that he offered no financial assistance to the governing body. 

SOD member Anna Leone pleaded with the council not to rezone the property. "If you rezone, it sends a message to Hekemian" Leone said. Instead, she suggested leaving the zoning be and letting the application run its course through the zoning board.

Council President Howard Berner and Councilman Austin Ashley have recused themselves from discussions involving the United Water Property. Councilman Ashely was absent from Monday's meeting.


Have a question or a news tip? Email the editor Ann Piccirillo at annpiccirillo@yahoo.com. Or, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. For news straight to your email inbox, sign up for our daily newsletter.

Rosemary Fuhrman August 21, 2012 at 04:39 PM
This is a very encouraging outcome from last night's meeting. I am "cautiously optimistic." With the COAH infrastructure in flux in Trenton, towns may be able to ease up on moving on their current plans for affordable housing. I still contend that New Milford can appeal to the state and ask for a re-evaluation of the affordable housing allocation, taking the United Water property out of the equation. The offering of this parcel of land for affordable housing pre-dated the last three major flood events that had a devastating impact on the citizens of New Milford. Even if your residence did not actually flood, the delays due to road closures, the lack of power, etc., etc. impacted a large majority of the residents. There must be another way to meet the affordable housing requirement and I hope our elected officials can spend time pursuing alternatives.
miriam pickett August 21, 2012 at 10:18 PM
Just back from a short trip and am very gratified to see that SOD has had such a positive effect on the future of the UW property. But I caution everyone who opposes this development not to become complacent. The battle is far from over. We must continue our efforts to keep this property a passive green space.
David Bednarcik August 22, 2012 at 02:21 AM
Miriam, sorry I missed the meeting. I'm confused too. what does this all mean?
miriam pickett August 22, 2012 at 09:01 PM
SOD received an email today from a new member who commented on the length of the meeting and the fact that the open session of the meeting didn't start until much later than was expected. This is indeed a pattern and I think it's up to everyone to let the M&C know that it is completely unfair to the public to take so long before the session opens up to comments from New Milford residents. There are many elderly people who are members of SOD who leave these meetings long before they have a chance to speak. How can this be in a democracy? It seems to me that the M&C should immediately allow the public to address them on any issue they see fit to speak about. One can only think that this is being used as a strategy to keep the public from having a say in the workings of our Borough.
Denise August 23, 2012 at 04:41 PM
Miriam, Oh they are a savvy bunch, the M&C.....I agree completely with what you have said above, especially the ending.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »