patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Councilman, Mayor Respond to Criticism

Mayor David Stahl and Councilman Michael Hughes say Recognition Agreement between township, Toll, and Wal-Mart is smart business.

 

At least two elected officials say Councilwoman Camille Ferraro is off base in her criticism of the conditions under which she and other councilmembers had to read a Recognition Agreement between Toll JM Urban Renewal LLC, Wal-Mart Stores East, LP.

Ferraro said she didn’t have enough time to review a Recognition Agreement between Toll JM Urban Renewal LLC, Wal-Mart Stores East, LP and the Township of East Brunswick before it was approved. She said the 100-page agreement was made public for two weeks and they had to read it in the municipal building, rather than at home and at their leisure.

But Council President Michael Hughes and Mayor David Stahl both disagree. Both reached out to the East Brunswick Patch independently and said that the Recognition Agreement and the agreement between the three groups was approved by the council, including Ferraro, and had been under negotiations for several months.

The Recognition Agreement concerns a lease agreement entered into in March between Wal-Mart and Toll Brothers, which will build a 151,507-square-foot Wal-Mart on the township owned Golden Triangle site at the corner of Tices Lane and Route 18.

Special township attorney Jeffrey Leher said the agreement is recognition of all sides’ rights under the lease and under the Redevelopment Agreement. He compared the Recognition Agreement to if he were to own a house and lease it to a tenant. He said the tenant would ask that if Lehrer reneged on his mortgage payments and the house was foreclosed upon that the tenant would not be forced out of their home by the lender.

“It’s public record,” said Hughes. “The mayor worked with our attorney, Jeff Leher, for a number of months and I believe we had a closed session with the attorney to go over the plan with council, and then an entire other meeting in public, where there was more then enough time for public input. At that meeting, Camille didn’t bother to voice these concerns."

Mayor Stahl had similar sentiments, saying that since 2011, when Republicans Ferraro, Hughes and James Wendell pushed for a change in the township’s redevelopment attorney, he has worked to keep all of them informed of progress made regarding the Golden Triangle.

“The concern is not one that was expressed publicly at a council meeting,” said Stahl. “As I said in the Sentinel (newspaper), I worked diligently to make sure the council has the appropriate information. We had an executive session, and the document was on file at the clerk’s office. I read it in the clerk’s office, and I think the council president and vice president (Wendell) read it there too.

“I just don’t think that’s fair. It maybe required a little extra work, but we’re elected officials. That’s what we do.”

Hughes said the agreement protects the township as much as it does Wal-Mart and Toll Brothers.

“This part protects us as much as it protects Wal-Mart. I can't think of a scenario where we'd want a default not remediated," said Hughes. “I can’t think of why we in the township would want that to happen.”

Ferraro also questioned the need for such an agreement, saying that the township is never asked to sign similar agreements with restaurants such as Hooters and the Tilted Kilt.

However, this is township owned property and the agreement is for a Redevelopment Project.

“It has absolutely nothing to do about it,” said Stahl. “A lease between any retailer and landlord, that’s a private lease between landlord and tenant. Here we have a piece of redevelopment land and it protects the redeveloper, the tenant and, obviously, it protects the township. This is good for the township, it gives us protection. I don’t t know why it suddenly is being portrayed as something out of the ordinary.”

Follow Patch on Facebook.

Visit www.facebook.com/EastBrunswickPatch and like us. You can also find us on Twitter at twitter.com/EBrunswickPatch.

Related Topics: Walmart, golden triangle, and recognition agreement

Norman

10:29 am on Thursday, September 6, 2012

So who is telling the truth and who is lying? Any of our other distinguished Council care to weigh in on this?

Reply
Comment_arrow

Martin Spielman

10:43 am on Thursday, September 6, 2012

Nobody said anyone was lying. What we are talking about in one sense is the transparency of government. If its not even clear to the councilperson what is going on then it is reasonable to assume that the issue needs further examination. In another sense the issue is that there are many residents with concerns about Walmart and its business practices. Townspeople what the most out of their tax dollar and so its no surprise that they are concerned about another questionable township project.

Martin Spielman

10:29 am on Thursday, September 6, 2012

Hmmmmm, a one hundred page document that hasn't been converted to electronic form, that can't be taken out of the clerk's office, that protects Walmart, and the mayor and councilman suddenly defensive, that makes township residents nervous as can be. Why would anyone have concerns?

Reply

Doug Z

11:29 am on Thursday, September 6, 2012

Not the first time Ferraro has been called out for playing fast and loose with facts to bolster her own arguments. Anyone remember how contentious meetings would get with her?

Telling that both Democrats and Republicans refute her points. I am actually shocked that Hughes can play nice in a sandbox with other people, especially Stahl. The odd couple indeed.

Reply

Ed Carduner

2:04 pm on Thursday, September 6, 2012

The timing of who reads what, when, is truly the tail on the dog. The overriding issue is that; if negotiations with Walmart, on a signature piece of Township property had been progressing for months, why did the residents find out about the deal at 11:59 on the deal clock. Are we not seeing shades of the Tower Center deal? It is time that the curtain of secrecy is lifted from Township government and if neither the Democrats, or Republicans are able to manage that, maybe it's time to bring people into office who are not beholden to partisan politics and believe in transparent government.

Reply

John Romano

4:29 pm on Thursday, September 6, 2012

I'm just a bit more than a little confused with all this. It was my understanding that the town ORIGINALLY sold off the land for an agreed upon price of +$30 million. A lawsuit was filed when Toll wanted to alter the development agreement.....a few yrs later ...bla..bla..bla ...... lawsuit was settled...and as a condition of said settlement the Toll organization got the land for +/-$22 million ....end of story, no more payments, E.B. screwed up royally ....again.

At THAT point....wouldn't E.B.'s ownership ties to the land be legally and officially severed? They have no say from that point on .....unless it's with a zoning / planning / buildings department type situation that the OWNER of the land needs to come in front of the town to resolve. Why would the town want to be tied to this land from any point forward...other than hopefully being able to collect the proper sum of taxes that would be due? Why is there another ridiculous "agreement" for the town to be sucked into?

Jeffrey Leher's description of the agreement and why it's needed makes no sense. If a landlord buys a house and rents it to a tenant...and the landlord defaults on their mortgage ....the issues are between the landlord and bank...and the tenant. Not with the original owner. That person should be sitting happily in a corner scrunching their toes in +$30 million dollars (oops..sorry, $22 million dollars)

In this case the land is supposed to be "paid for" ...there is no "bank".

Reply

Jean Vitta

8:28 pm on Thursday, September 6, 2012

I wonder why we are once again dealing with Toll Brothers since we were burnt by the first deal. Why is the Golden Triangle being voted on and passed at the worse times for the citizens of East Brunswick. It is not the ideal time to make such decisions the last week of August and the night before school goes back into session. I think the reason for the time the decisions were done is because Mayor Stahl knows his chances of re-election are not guaranteed, so he needed to get whatever payoffs now before he loses in November.

Reply

Ed T

11:40 pm on Friday, September 7, 2012

This entire deal has been a mess since day one. It's pretty sad what is happening to EB. Another 400 apartments and Walmart. Seriously?

Reply

Jean Vitta

9:17 am on Saturday, September 8, 2012

Like putting lipstick on a pig.

Reply

Leave a comment