All right, we're gonna get started. In ordinance with the open public meeting act and state law, be advised that the notice that this meeting was made as required by law and that this meeting would take place at the Milurn Education Center at 7 p.m. on July 29th,
2026. Meeting details in the draft agenda were also posted on our township website. Please all stand of to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible with
liberty and justice for all. >> Roll call, please. >> Mr. Cohen, >> here. >> Mr. Cosro, >> here. >> Mr. Cerudo >> here. >> Mr. Stler, >> present. >> Mayor Sakami >> here. >> Thank you. >> All right. Attorney Caner, we received some questions about the notice requirements for tonight's meeting
before we discuss this matter. >> Yes, thank you, Mayor. Good evening, everyone. Um, so this is in response to some emails uh that were received by the township, the clerk's office, and some online comments about the noticing of
tonight's meeting. Um, so before the content committee proceeds with tonight's meeting, I would like to address several questions that have been raised concerning notice of this meeting under the New Jersey Open Public Media Act, better known as COA, which is NJSA
104-6 through 104-21. I'm making this statement because there appears to be some confusion among members of the public regarding requirements of OMA, particularly the distinction between a properly noticed special meeting and an emergency
meeting. I want to ensure I want to ensure that everyone understands the legal requirements applicable to tonight's meeting. The township has fully complied with all the requirements of OMA. OMA recognizes several different types of meeting. The two relevant here
are regular meetings and special meetings. A regular meeting is defined as a meeting that appears on the annual schedule of meetings adopted by a public body. And that's what we do on New Year's Day. We pass the resolution and it lists all our regular meetings. And
at those meetings, we conduct any regular business without further notice. The distinction between a regular meeting and a special meeting like we're having tonight concerns when and how the meeting is noticed, not the authority of the
governing body to conduct business once that meeting is properly noticed. So once either a regular or special meeting is properly noticed under OPMA, the governing body may deliberate may deliberate, consider matters before it, and take formal action as authorized by
law. Tonight's meeting is not an emergency meeting, but a properly noticed special meeting under OMA. The emergency meeting provisions only apply when adequate notice cannot be provided because of the urgent and unforeseeable circumstance requiring immediate action.
Those meetings require additional statutory finding and the approval by three quarters of of any governing body. Those permission those provisions do not apply here because this meeting was noted with more than 48 hours advanced notice. In fact, it was posted on July
23rd. OMA defines adequate notice as written notice as provide at least 48 hours in advance and states the time, date, location, and whether formal action may or may not be taken and list the agenda
set note. Uh I I reviewed and I drafted notice for this meeting and I and it does provide all that relevant information and is compliant with the statute. The task complies with each of those statutory requirements by providing more than 48 hours written notice identifying the time, date,
location, formal action would be taken and the agenda as was known at the time the notice was issued. Some comments have also suggested that all supporting documents have to be posted at least 48 hours before the meeting. That is simply not a requirement of MA. MA contains no
provision requiring resolutions, ordinances, agreements, reports, or other supporting material to be posted or distributed hours before a meeting. The statute governs notice of meeting, not advanced publication of of meeting materials. Nevertheless, although the
township was not legally required to do so under OPMA, the township did post meeting materials on its website before tonight's meeting. So, members of the public would have an opportunity to review in advance. The township and this committee especially remains committed to transparency while complying with
requirements established by the legislature. Finally, just for completeness, um requires the commencement of every meeting. The presiding officer which here is our mayor announced that adequate notice has been provided and specify the time place and matter in
which notice was given. This statement is made in furtherance of that statutory requirement and to clarify the legal base for tonight's meeting and the mayor gave that statement at the at the onset of accordingly because the town has fulfilled and complied with all applicable requirements of the open
public meetings act. This meeting has been lawfully convened and the township committee may proceed with the business for it. Thank you. >> Thank you, Attorney. I have a motion to approve the agenda. So move. May I have a second? >> Second.
>> All those in favor? >> Any opposed? No. All right. We now have a presentation by our special counsel, Joe Bowman, who will go over the proposed settlement agreement that we will vote on later tonight, relocate the Nine Main Street project to an
alternative site. Maybe turn the screen a little bit so that the public can see it. Mayor All right. Thank you. >> My name is Joe Bowman. I'm with the law firm of McManam in Scotland and B. I'm
joined with my partner Jess Almeida. Uh our firm was retained a couple of years ago for the purpose of assisting uh the township with at that time uh the ongoing dispute related to nine main
street. Um by way of background I've been doing this about 40 years 38 to be precise. Um and so we're deep we have deep knowledge in redevelopment development pro housing. um and uh representing public bodies. So we
effectively served as your lawyer, you know, working with the governing body, working with them pretty closely with the mayor. I have to tell you, uh we have developed this uh PowerPoint uh that we're going to walk through. Uh the PowerPoint is designed to remind
everyone, much of which I'm sure you are well aware, you lived it, the history, like how did we get to here? How did we get from there to here? And then our recommendation uh the governing the the lawyers on the job the planners and then the the governing body about
what next steps to be taking. Um and as we're going through it um I'll certainly want to take the opportunity to editorialize a little bit along the way and then um at the end I guess comments from the council and otherwise.
So look um the goal here was uh how to uh make a better deal for Mil right um and and so what's always important is to understand Milurn is a corporation right so prior
uh governing bodies bind that corporation and so now the new governing body comes in they now speak for the corporation but the corporation continues to exist and the corporation engage in a process process and undertook agreements that bounded. Um
and so when the governing body came to be, the the most recent elected officials, they had those agreements in place. Um you can't just decide you're not going to do that. So um to begin
with, let's go back to 2021. So what is the project that was originally uh agreed to? 75 units 100% affordable. So everybody in that unit would be an affordable housing family that's qualified
township sponsor typical of a 100% affordable. The township agreed that to the extent that the project cannot uh pay for itself which affordable projects never can. Uh the township agreed that they would fund the gap. The gap is an
important number that you're going to hear about. You would probably recall it from back then. It doesn't go away in the New Deal. Uh but that was an obligation the township took on in 2021. We're going to sponsor the project and do everything that goes with that. Give you free land and fund a gap in your
financing. Um and then the last component was it was going to be built on the DPW site. Everyone's familiar with the site in Melbourne. Can you become familiar with the site in Milbour? Uh not an ideal site. Not an ideal site for resident.
Um, as you know, the DBW site is where the salt dome is, the vehicle fueling stations, the snowplow fleet, the resident bulk waste, the recycling drop off. Um, and when that agreement was first signed, the parties admitted that they weren't
really sure uh if this was going to be the right stuff. They weren't sure it would be feasible. The agreement was signed nonetheless, and we were off to the races. and Melbourne was off to the races to try and figure out how to make that site work at the time not knowing
where the DPW may go when the time came to leave the site so the project could get to. So give you a little sort of lowbylow through the through the uh the next couple years to come. So the settlement agreement is approved July 30th, 2021.
Now we're bound. We're bound to move forward with this agreement. RPM is the conditional developer February 2022. Planning board adopts a uh housing fair share plan July 2022. March of 2023
resolution 23-85. We agree to fund the main street redevelopment plan. April there's a compliance hearing the town of California court. The DPWs is realistic for affordable housing. May 23 conditional judgment of compliance entered and then the plan
June of 2023 is adopted memorializing the zoning for this site. So about the site, you know, this DPW site where in 2021 to 2023, we took action to agree to develop a residential project.
Uh on that site roughly 2,300 cubic yards of soil 10 underground storage tanks at five municipal properties were spread as subgrade half of 5 in of asphalt was classified at the time as a ID27
industrial waste petrole as we think about it. Um although the D app proved the use of the material to raise the grade of the site these compounds at the time they approved it they are not they exceed the current MGB um standard. So while when it was done
it was probably it was okay it isn't under today's standards uh and the contamination is sitewide it was it's not in a single identifiable space so easy to remove it's across the uh site and in the end the solution the solving
that problem is to dig it up and remove it not a uh not a cheap exercise as you might imagine digging it up and then properly disposing of it uh at a facility that takes that kind dirt and there was a stigma attached
that uh was identified by the folks this council on the public. Um we're going to put the affordable housing families at the DPW. Clearly not an ideal narrative about where we want to put our affordable
housing bins. So that site um identify a number of critical uh issues that were going to be had to be resolved as a part of that and what's not a proper site for us. First place we're going to remediate it. Now
the numbers a big range $3 to $9 million but it was a number it was at least $3 million number once we got in there a lot more expensive. Um the uh there's also the ongoing risk when you remediate
the site. Um you still have the possibility that plaintiffs attorneys years to come people get sick at the site. Um someone looks back and says, "Oh, it's because the proper wasn't properly needed." So there's this ongoing exposure or lawsuits because
people are now living at that site. What happens uh if someone gets sick and you woring it? Although New Jersey most recently you're following Keyboard and not even at the sites of adjacent dump where now Keyboard is identifying cancer clusters, right? That that dump that was
presumably closed properly. Um so it's it's never never it doesn't become an issue. Um the project was 100% affordable. Now, back in the day, that was pretty common, but now everyone understands that the better affordable housing project includes market and
affordable housing in the same facility. That is the better way to provide. It's not that 100% can't meet the requirements, doesn't happen in New Jersey, New Jersey, but the better way is to do a project that is fixed income, not all affordable.
Um the um I was sort of surprised to learn this as I listen on that but there was no plan for where the DPW might go. Milburn is not you know doesn't have a lot of vacant um so at the time and then not only when the agreement is signed but
for two years ongoing I don't think a plan was ever actually developed. So, where will the DPW go? Uh, once we had to turn off this sign, which we would have had to do eventually, whether or not we found a DPW, um, it's there's a flood plane to enter,
enter, and exit the facility. Um, and then because it's 100% affordable, the pilot revenue was limited by definition across all federal housing, the pilot paintings are generally driven by FHA requires 6.2% of the gross revenues. uh
when you have 100% affordable housing, it's a fairly low number. So I think um objectively objectively uh this was not for developing for affordable housing 100% affordable housing project but uh
Milburn had already agreed to in spring of 2022. Um the residents speak out. I guess there was a petition over 2,000 signatures objecting to the project. Continuing through the summer 22, strong
public opposition. In January 2nd of 2024, uh new council members are sworn in running on a platform to uh terminate uh the development on DBW4 affordable
housing budget. So for the next two years, uh, Milbourne engages in a process of litigation. As I said, you had already bound yourselves through a couple years of various actions to do the project. The
new governing body comes in and they said, "We're not this is wrong. We're not doing it. And if you're going to force us, we're going to let you do it. Um and so they take a number of actions which are very critical and become important when our law firm becomes
involved. First they voted down resolution 24077 which would have authorized the redevelopment agreement with RPM. They desdes the DPW site as an area need redevelopment and rejected the redevelopment agreement and then they
repealed the redevelopment plan. The township told the court that Nine Main Street was not feasible and asked for 90 days to propose an alternative site. They proposed alternative sites. Nevertheless, the RPM moved to enforce
the settlement um on their terms and the lawsuits. August 9, 2024, um judge resends the resolution designating him. Basically the court says no you're not going to be deal
designating him they are the redeveloper and oh by the way lawyers for having to fight it special master recommends nine adopts it over township objection and you'll see April spring September what's happening here is the lit the RPM is suing to
enforce their rights under contracts and we're fighting not to continue to uh line with those agreements. every step of the way. Why that's important um and why I think we are here today is Milbour demonstrated
first through public petitions and outcry, second through public elections of governing body and third for a willingness to litigate and pay the costs associated with that till the end that we were not backing down. This was
going to be a lawsuit. This was going to be a lawsuit that we were going to engage in for the next >> that so why that's important and council may share this story but when I was called the year before uh they held we told we interviewed the government and I
said I don't think I can help you. I don't think I can help you because we have these contracts. The court is ruling against you every day and you're paying the lawyers and I generally don't like to represent clients and just get paid if I don't think I can win and get you the results you want. And they said,
"Sure, you're going to get this done." And and honestly, without their support and our help, it would we wouldn't be here today if the governing body wasn't so engaged and so determined and so persistent. And if they hadn't effectively shown the RPM and the courts
and the fair share housing folks and everyone else in involved that one way or the other, we were going to fight and we were and if it took us 10 years, this wasn't happening and we were going to have a conversation about how we could do it better. We were not going to have
a conversation about not doing it at all because we understood that we had a constitutional obligation and we had confidence. But we were going to have a conversation about how do we do it better? How do we do it better? Not can't, not won't, because that was not
an option to us. And so the next slide is important. So what what is always important to keep in mind, we'll probably say this more than once tonight, is we have to remember the hand we're dealt, right? We're playing cards, so to speak, and we have this hand and
they have that hand. And so there's certain things that we had to accept that we were not going to be able to change, but the most fundamental things that were most important to us, we were going to move the needle on. And I think you'll hopefully see as we go through the uh where we end up today in the
agreement in front of the governing body today that we made changes we needed to make, but we still had to accept some of the requirements that we may not have liked to have had to accept, but we had already agreed to. So the realities of the situation that we began 72 75
affordable housing units had to be built. We were not going to have 74. We were not going to have 72. They probably wanted 90 75. That was going to be the number of affordable housing. We had to sponsor it. We were not going to be able to walk away from the $20
million obligation to sponsor it we made in 2021. That was never going to happen. We were going to have to be the sponsor. This is where the governing body drew the line in the sand and ultimately uh RPM understood the wisdom of it. It
had to be done in the downtown. It wasn't going to happen on the DP subway site. That was wrong. That's the wrong place for it. We're going to do an affordable housing project. They th those those folks need to live in the middle of our downtown, not sandwiched between a rail yard and a and a
PSG facility um and a for on a former dome. So, and also RPM was our partner like that was also not going to change. So those were three of them were things that we had no choice about and the fourth one was our non-starter or it had
to be had to be moved for the downtown clarification. The requirement for it to be downtown was actually in 2021 settlement agreement. So wasn't our choice. Uh it was mandated by the contract that was signed by >> I should have said mayor it wasn't going
to be it wasn't going to be a better way to connect. Thank you. Um, all right. So, uh, we developed a new idea with the help of the mayor and the governor. Um, there's a site at the corner of
Essex Spring and Milbour Avenue um that we thought could be an ideal location for an inclusionary mixed income, not just a portal, housing uh, project that also can have some retail. So a truly mixed use mixed in income project. Uh
it's the location of the rim site rimback site means healthy to me. I think means healthy to everybody else. Um steps from the downtown New Jersey Transit a much better location. And so after getting our ducks in the
road, getting our u our uh plan back so ready, we had our first meeting December one, 2025. Uh the mayor was there, councilman store was there, the professionals were there. We we met with RPM and we explained to them, you know, we
know know in certain terms that the path going forward was litigation for 10 years or an alternative site. Uh this is the alternative site. This is where we think it makes most sense. Um this is where we want to have it happen.
So that was followed by um pretty much the rest of the the rest of the winter uh negotiations. Township RPM fair share housing center we had nobody in they haven't been third party in it um and
then um when we were going through the process uh what was became pretty clear and our planners here also was helping us figure out where can we put the where where will this fit and how how because we had to have we weren't going to be able to
count an RPM to figure out how to build a project or what could fit on the site we had to do that for ourselves and present it to them and So with our planner self, we identified these parcels, but we didn't own all. It was one that we didn't own um that we we concluded we had to buy um because we
needed a portion of it to do the project. And when we get to the end, you'll see how that pro piece of property uh comes to play. No, no, but um as we're moving through the process with RPM and I have to say that there was huge distrust on our side of RPM and
RPM, you might expect had huge distrust of distrust to us. So along the way, we also wanted to uh demonstrate that this wasn't a pro an effort to delay that we were serious about the alternative site, serious about doing a real project. And part of the way we demonstrated that was
we acquired authorized the acquisition of the parcel that need we needed to complete the project. Um and that became important for two reasons. One demonstrated to them that we were serious as a governing body. We were willing to put our money where our mouth is get the property. two,
as you as you when we get to the terms of the agreement, we didn't want to have anything out of our control that would allow would possibly cause us to not comply with the settlement agreement once it's done. And so, if we had left it uncertain about our ability to own
this land to complete the parcel, we would have put ourselves at risk for a third party not wanting to sell it to us or for us to use some more extreme means to acquire it. And that was a risk that we uh the governing body was not willing to take. So so it had the two benefits of taking uh not putting us at risk with
a third party that we can't control cooperating in our new project by selling us the land and it also demonstrated to RPM that we were serious about this transaction. So, um, we continue sort of the negotiation,
um, which ultimately required the mayor and the councilman to join the professionals out of New York to close the deal. It was the proverbial, we were closed. We were down to a handful of final issues. Uh, the council uh, councilman and the mayor had
to get in the room with us and they did look RPM in the face and say, "Look, this is the deal. We're ready to do it. We're serious." uh about it and and have the principles meet and agree that you know this was an effort for both of us to avoid years of litigations move
forward and objectively they understood this is just a better project this is a better solution RPM would would tell you too I believe that this is a better project than the one that they funded uh so the new project
what's going to get built so the new project uh is found 93 units, not 75, but the difference are market rate. So, it's 75 affordable housing and 18 market rate. So, it's a mixed income project. Again, remember the other one
was 100% affordable, mixed in. It also has ground for commercial, so it's mixed use consistent with a downtown smart growth project, right? People living, people shopping. Um, it's right next to um it's right next to town hall. It's in
the perfect location, not through park transit. It is an ideal location um for people to live as opposed to the dot. So what do we think uh we solve with an
alternative project? So the new site has no known contamination history. We are doing phase one and phase two. We don't expect to find old boom. Uh we know what the prior uses were. So unlike the older the prior site, it's expected to be clean site. Um
the uh there's nothing to disturb because it's clean so we don't have to worry about when like RPM when they were digging out the foundation, they would had to dig out the contaminated soil. We hadn't moved it already. Um we we we are not building on a contaminate. that risk I talked about of future residents
filing lawsuits cancer cluster and keyport not an issue on this site. Um it addresses the stigma the stigma of having our affordable affordable families living at the dome. It's fixed income and mixed use. So it
is both the market rates and affordable. Importantly and this is the multi-million dollar benefit. It doesn't require us to uh relocate our DPW to where we don't know anyway. Now it's not stays where it is which is honestly
where walls uh it fronts on multiple streets. It just doesn't front on one. So there's it it fronts on more streets and because it has an affordable nonaffordable market rate component. It also is ultimately going to be paying more more
than so. So it's more money every year going forward for the next couple weeks. So when we're going through this process um we engage our professional team and for for the middle we engaged aca is our
financial advisor. Aacia um was advising us every step of the way on the financial impact the numbers uh to make sure that we're on the line on what uh the project will likely cost. The munal gap funding. So the misal gap funding and that's that's the subject of the
bond order with you today was happening in either case right as I said before we are sponsoring this project it means we're giving the land for free above and we're also going to fund any gap we the current estimate of the original gap for the 10% contingency brought the dollars
forward was about 20 million78,000 bucks we're now at 21,800 so the numbers are pretty sim close I will tell you that we everyone one expects it to be less. And why do we all expect it to be less? Because this is the number in the agreement that we're
promising RPM to adopt the bar owners for and have regular when we need it. You can rest assured and we know because we proved out the numbers that they made sure that it was the highest. The actual amount we pay is an actual number required at the time the project is designed, reformers are built, the
closing is occurring, and they're closing on all their tax credits and their financing, and everybody knows what the actual is. We fully expect that number to be I would say significantly lower but it's it's a number that's the high end of what we expect to have to pay and again that's a number that we
pay at closing which as we sit here today is 2028 just to set everyone's expectations that project doesn't like break ground until 2028 they still have to design build it they have to go to the state and get the tax incentives associated with there's a lot of work to
be doing here so um so that that's the number of it uh so the differences. Let's say the gap is not that different at the end of the day between um as part of this project. Uh when we went in, we had to we used a hammer and
a carrot. So the hammer was we're going to fight this for the next 10 years. Good luck. Um the carrot was we will make a payment to you of $1,750,000. That was a negotiable number. They wanted more, we wanted less. And that's where we ended up. Why did why were we
willing to do that? Well, because the DPW relocation is $11 million price and $1,750,000 is less than 11 million. Um, and so from our perspective where that number landed and u again it
was a back and forth of negotiation, but we pretty confident that that was going to be a huge win. So, it was okay for us to offer the carrot in addition to the hammer um in order to get the deal closed. So, they will get a $1,750,000
payment from us on top of the gap at closing. Um we also agreed to reduce to reimburse them for their expenses to design the original projects. Their position was look, you're telling us we got to go to
design this new project. we already have us all this sunk cost that's you pretty much useless the project that never gets built. We're going to expect you to reimburse that. So that is also going to be required at closing. It's um going to be at it's third party cost verify uh cost that they'll shut the shelves bills
included that they open. Okay. So, so when you add all that together, the cost to us for the alternative new project is 28 million875 estimate 25 million875 estimate um expected to be lower versus
um 34,780,000 if they hadn't gone forward. The big difference being relocating DBW and remediating again this is the three you remember I said 3 to 10. We use three in this up format. Um but the new project
is millions of dollars less. Uh and then um like we had to do with the old project and the new project we we collect about a million dollars a year into our portfolio trust fund. Uh we anticipate that we'll be using uh chunk
big chunk of that every year to pay the debt service. But the expectation and that money comes not from taxes but from developer you know through the ordinance. uh our our hope and expectation is that that will uh pay for the debt over time um that we have to borrow in order to pay for this money.
But again, I I'll keep saying this, we had this we were paying that money one way or the other, right? We were paying we were a sponsor and we had to fund it again. The old project argued about that didn't change. Um they have a better project.
So the terms of the settlement. So there's a couple things on our agenda tonight. Uh there's a settlement agreement. That agreement is the comprehensive roadmap to get us from today if it's approved to the closing uh which could be I currently expected 2028
but it could be late. Um there's also we we'll see on your agenda there's the financial agreement which is FHA form very similar to what was in the original deal that's being applied in a and a resolution required by the FHA. So, um,
we're doing all that type against you because we want to get everything that we're responsible for, we want to get done right away because once we do every check off our all our boxes, there's no ability for them to say we are in default. They can go back to DPW because that is the penalty for us not doing
what we say we're going to do. So, in terms of the settlement, RPM will build on the new site, not the old site. We will convey the land for $1 like we were going to before. Um RPM is going to get paid 1.7 million
$1,750,000 at closing plus the roughly $525,000 of out of pocket expenses. We're going to have to cover the gap subsidy which would be due at closing. That's why the bond ordinance is uh up for today. can't a municipal body can't
promise to make a payment if they don't have the money for it. The bond ord is up tonight. Um and then the township um the uh the third love round and the law states. So what will happen next we're going to uh
do an escro account. So in typical in these situations um there's a bunch of things that are going to have to happen over time. They get s they get poke with a a third party escro account title company or something someone similar and in our escro account we're going to put
um mutual releases that'll be uh given the deeds to the property to be released $1,750,000 which we have available already have to go into that escro account. So that that money will sit in escrow uh available uh
in the event of one or two things happening. One uh we default we don't do what we said we're going to do which most of it we expect to get done by September 1st. So we'll know in September whether we did everything we're supposed to do or two
we do alternative project which is what everyone fully expects to and in that case the money um if the township defaults there's a cure period but our most important things we have to do are we need to uh adopt a new redevelopment plan for this
area that redevelopment plan has been negotiated with the developer it's attached in the exhibit and that was important that we attached the critical documents because we didn't want to leave up to chance future negotiations. So, this settlement agreement took as long as it did because the redevelopment
plan that we're going to send to the planning board tonight is an exhibit to this uh redevelopment. We didn't want to risk having a debate or a negotiation of what should be in that plan. So, tonight we will send the uh redevelopment plan to the planning board for their comment. They'll come back. We expect that to
happen on September. Um the financial agreement uh we want to get done right away, right? We don't want to put that up to chance to that'll get done. Um the only thing that we're going to leave to do is planning board will have to review the plan and comment on it if it's consistent with the master
plan. Our planners think it is. Uh the planning board will refer it back to us and then the governing body will adopt the ordinance and then the plan is in place. That same night we expect to adopt the redevelopment agreement. The redevelopment agreement is very similar to the one in the BBW also at part of
this but we're not trying to reinvent things that we agreed to before uh but that agreement is exhibit um and while it may change a little bit between now and then it's subsequently done so that also does not get negotiated going forward. So on the night when we adopt the plan, we're going to redevelopment.
As once those things happen, the financial agreement is done, the redevelopment plans in place, the redevelopment agreement signed, the governing body will have completed all of our tasks and now they're going to the planning board uh with an asthma right application and the you know the planning will do what the planning board
is required to do and review the application, project studies, everything that a planning board has to do, they're still going to be expected to do, but the redevelopment plan will be in place. So the expectation is that application to the planning board will be an as of right application same as DPW by the
way. Um but the planning board again will do their own due diligence that they always do for any site plan. The site plan process isn't changed has to go forward. Um but we will have achieved all of our all the areas where we think we can be in the fall um will be
completed by September. Um and and that is in part because we've agreed on everything substantively with the developer already. Um, in the meantime, the lawsuit that's held in the days while we're doing all this, we have to
get the laws. >> Well, we have Yeah, we have to get it blessed, >> right? >> Yeah. So, while we're doing all this, um, we have to go to the career. We have to get blessed this, but we fully expect they will. All the parties are on board, but we will most likely have done everything we need to do before we
actually finally have the final. Yeah, we'll have we'll have a fair hearing on this agreement hearing at the original settlement before the court on August for our compliance hearing. At that time, we presented this court and ask
the court to schedule a fairness to be on the public >> round three round. Um, so what are we doing tonight? So, we're going to authorize the
execution of the global settlement agreement. RPM has already signed it. We told RPM that we were not going to show up at the governing body, ask this council to approve agreement and risk it not being signed tomorrow. Again, we're working on trust. So, we have that we
have the counter sign uh settlement agree with this tonight. If the governing body uh deems it wise to approve it, the mayor will be authorized to sign it. Right. Um we're going to do a resolution on needs a technical resolution uh required by fair by fair
housing act but it basically says that you know the property um is needed the project um we're going to authorize the financial agreement which we will also sign right away. Um that's the FHA form 6.28%
pilot on the affordable 10% a larger pilot on the commercial and the re and the the market rate units. Um, we're going to introduce the redevelopment plan. As I said, we're going to send it to the uh planning board. We're going to get their comments back. Again, I'm moving in the right day, September one.
Uh, but we hope to have it back and uh adopt the plan. And then we're going to introduce the bond ordinance. U the bond ordinance is also a critical. We need to have the funds 2018 when we finally um when we finally require them. That was actually you know
to sort of share the how the sausage gets paid a little bit. Uh the governing the uh RPM wanted us to put the money in the esro account. Um we convinced them that uh having a bond ordinance in place which is valid
all appropriation and that then leaving it to the uh pad BA and CFO to borrow the money um should protect them. We also agree in the settlement agreement that if we don't give them the money they can go to according to us give them the money. Um that was pretty important
to us because as you can imagine having $23 million sitting around an escro counter 2% for the next two years. Why are you paying for uh was bad that bad? Um but but that was sort of the example of the kind of um minutia uh that we had to get into um to get a transaction that
they were comfortable with because they were worried that come time to give them 23 million bucks. That governing body again could be 202 would say n. Um, so the ordinance is really a critical component of that and the ability for us
not to have to borrow the money today and wait till they actually need the money and we actually then know the exact amount too I would say um was a really a really good compromise to see that and so what this does what is this deliver
>> so 75 affordable housing homes as included in our plan as promised Not not DBW stays where it is. You don't have to find a place for it, much less relocate it. We don't have the clean.
It replaces an income segregated project with a mixed income project. That is the best practice in affordable housing. Providing affordable housing is that mixed income. Um so it's a best practice solution to affordable housing. Um it also generates revenues uh from the
property that should will be next of what we've otherwise got because it does have a market component does have retail. Um it meets the round free affordable housing obligation and it ends that 10 year litigation that I thought
that we had begun on year two. Um but could have gone on for years and years. So this council doing his 38 years with my partner uh we strongly recommended that the uh governing mayor and the council favorably consider this. We think this
is a huge victory um for Melbourne and it's really it's really a a story about how um the public can uh see a issue that they
object to rally signatures and support elect folks to that hear them agree put up a fight and then come to a solution that is a better project at So, uh, as I said to the councilman when he first called me, I don't think I'm
going to be able to get this to happen for you. And yet, here we are. And that's really driven by the mayor, the councilman, and the entire governing body. Um, we had plenty of meetings with them. We discussed it. Um, they always had the professional teams back. They
always gave us clear direction. Um, we they were on the mayor. We were texting at 5:00 a.m. on Saturday, uh, trying to get this resolved. So, uh, they were in the weeds, um, decree the man councilman, uh, every step of the way, and we couldn't have done it, uh,
without them sort of being that involved with us. Uh, as a lawyer, to have a client that participates in the process to that level. Um, just makes our life so much easier. Um, and so we strongly recommend that you consider this favorably. And that's the end of my
remarks. questions. First question, you refer to the councilman. I assume you mean solar. >> That's it. Sorry. >> Uh and then I I just think it would be good for the public to get an understanding of why we're conveying a
new site for a dollar. And correct me if my understanding is wrong, but my understanding is the terms of the original settlement agreement were going to require us to convey nine main street for a dollar. That's something that was established would not be able to change. The other thing was established that we
couldn't change. Since the township had sponsored the project, which means we were to charge them $5 million of land, we would end up paying them that $5 million as part of the gap because they are only going to get this the amount of public funding that they're going to get and
they're required to maximize the amount of funding. So would it make any sense to charge them anything more than a dollar for the site? No one has ever done that. I'm aware. >> We would just pay for it one way or another. Correct.
Um, and then the other thing, so just to be clear, they're not they have no ability in any way to build on both sites. They get one or the other. And the only way they get nine main is if we screw up and we default in some way. >> Correct.
>> Okay. Um, and then additionally, if they end up building on nine main for whatever reason, they're not entitled to their nine main development costs. Correct. >> They're nonit 5.5. Right. >> Right. Okay. So, basically,
they have a financial incentive to do the new project because they get the extra 1.75 million. It's a better site. It's a a better project and the town's going to get more pilot revenue than they would otherwise. >> Correct. >> And I'd like to make a clarification as
well. uh in this process you discussed the uh payments uh in lie of the 1.75 million if that becomes an issue is that we would have had a pay we never had a plan to relocate the DPW site anywhere else the best plan was given not by us
by other administrations to put it on the leaf collection center at JFK right next to our aquifer I would have loved to see how that was taken through on top of that the $3 million for mediation may have been low because I remember a town survey where we actually about 15 people
voted actually probably more than that >> more than that. >> Um people voted to actually dig every last kernel of sand out there down a bedrock and truck it through town to another site. I think that estimate was about six to 8 million 10 million
somewhere in that neighborhood. So, not only the incentive, the 1.75 versus the remediation versus the cost to relocate the DW site is significant. >> When you look at it from a financial perspective, it made all the sense,
makes all the sense in the world. Just want to clarify that. >> I guess the question would be, do you >> do you concur with I did I He led the witness. >> Yes. >> Uh do any other members of the committee
have any questions? >> All right. Um Attorney Caner, do you have anything you want to add before we conclude the presentation? >> I just want to thank uh Joe and Jessica for all their hard work. Uh working with them was was a real pleasure. They're
real professional. the knowledge that they bring uh to this particular field and in general in their firm uh they really stepped up here. Uh it was again a privilege. I think the uh committee made a great decision uh in hiring uh Joe and Jessica uh and you know they
were there for the mayor of 5 a.m. Uh they negotiated hard on behalf of the township. Um they didn't they weren't just doing a job. You can tell they really got involved and that's what you need lawyers. They weren't just doing a job. They were trying to win for the township. um they weren't letting points go. If they saw a leverage point, they
used it. If they saw a negotiation point, didn't leave anything on the table. I think the deal points um that may be concerning, believe me, they were worse when they started and we got to the best point possible. And having witnessed the negotiations, I'm confident um that this is the best deal
that Mil could have gotten uh for this uh with the outcome of having this project with my main. Um, I also, you know, believe the efforts of Mayor, Captain Stler, uh, and the rest of the committee in being committed from the beginning, uh, to move this off of NA to
allow me to litigate for two years to come back with a loss and fees and they say, "Good job." You know, good job, Jared. You lost and you got fees, but the project's not getting built. Um, and that was time after time. Um, and to the point where they supported us in the
division and to Joe's point, uh, they were committed. the entire committee was committed to fighting uh to write the wrong of an I main street project. So I you know I give everybody on this day thumbs up men thumbs up and I also want to mention obviously Alex Alex's support
um he was there throughout the entire project. Our content planner Graham was a true team effort uh obviously led by Joe Bowman and Jessica. So that that's what I would like to add. >> Great. Before we begin public comment, I just want to address something directly
because I expect it'll come up tonight. We would all have preferred to have had all of the settlement documents we released yesterday in resident's hands soon. But indulge me for a moment while I explain why that wasn't possible. This is a third party three-party agreement.
Yesterday, some language of the settlement was still being finalized amongst the township RPM chair housing. Our council advised us not to release a settlement to the public while it was still changing, and that was sound advice. Ending a draft to a resident
that isn't agreed upon doesn't inform them. It'll merely confuse and misinform them. What we did do was tell you what we had as soon as we had it. We announced the framework of this settlement publicly at our July 14th
meeting. Tap into reported uh on it within days. We issued a full press release on Monday which the township uh circulated via various channels and I personally also put out on happy build. The documents followed the moment they
were final and for anyone paying attention the last several TC meetings. It was pretty clear what we were working towards. In fact, I I will credit uh Mr. Feld. He he figured it out and made a post about it online weeks ago. He
figured out that we were going to build on the rimback. So, >> so we're meeting and voting on the settlement tonight or suing group rather than our August meeting because the township has a fourth round compliance hearing before the court on August 12th. We've already represented
to the court that we have a settlement. If you've been following the court documents, you've seen that the requests for adjourment were because we were working towards a settlement. So, it's been no secret that a settlement is in the works. Um, and showing up to court on the 12th without a fully executed
settlement document in hand could put our fourth round compliance at risk and we're not willing to do that. One of the things that I think they forgot to mention is RPM even though they shouldn't have been allowed to is they were round three only. They were able to insert themselves in our round four
compliance process >> and they were we we asked the judge to not allow that and the judge said no I I want to see what they have to say and and I feel that it's relevant that you know you haven't built what you said you were going to build. So, like it or not,
we're stuck with RPM and our foreground compliance. And one of the things that uh is going to be happening with this is they're going to have to support us in court uh with this alternative project. And that will hopefully allow our fourth round uh compliance hearing to go well and for us to get compliance and
immunity for the next 10 years. But I'd like to ask residents to compare this process to the one that produced a deal that we're here to clean up. In 2021, the affordable housing settlement agreement was not made public until after the township committee had already
voted on it. Residents did not get to comment until after the final decision had been made. This is not how this administration operates. Tonight, we gave a detailed presentation of the settlement and soon we will have public comment before we take any official action.
Finally, the ordinances that accompany this settlement come back for public hearing at our future meetings. So you will not only be heard tonight, you'll also have the opportunity to be heard again at the second reading of the ordinances that we're introducing tonight. So with all that out of the way, we will
now have public comment. When invited to speak to offer your comments, please come to the lectern clearly state your name and whether you are Melbourne resident andor property or business owner. Please do not provide your full address seeing as our meetings are recorded and are readily available
to the public. to help facilitate an orderly meeting and permit all to be heard. Speakers shall limit their comments to one three-minut session. We will be prompted when there is 30 seconds remaining. A reminder, this is not a time for dialogue or to debate a
matter. This is a time during our business meeting for the public to offer comments. I now open the public comment period. It >> seems like the microphone is not working, but the Zoom will pick you up
just fine. So, just project. >> There we go. Oen Mitch, Milburn res. >> Good evening, Mayor Sakami, members of the township committee, and my fellow Milburn residents. Tonight feels like a
real victory for our town and I want to congratulate this governing body for delivering a solution that protects our community and honors our veterans. Many of us fought hard against the plan to build a 100%
income segregated affordable housing development on the DPW site which is the town done. We weren't trying to block affordable housing. We were trying to protect the people who would live there. I am one of those people who fought hard
for this. That land is contaminated. It floods. It sits next to rail lines and utility sub um subst sub substation and right next to our middle school. It was never safe or dignified place to
put families. And now with the recent statewide reporting showing how toxins linger for decades on formal industrial and landfill sites, we know our concerns were not only valid, they were real. Milbour's decision to remove residential
development from the DPW site is not just smart, it is protective. It shields future tenants from exposure. It shields us taxpayers from liability. And it shields our town from making a mistake that could have harmed people for generations.
I say the new mixed used development downtown fulfills our affordable housing obligation in a way that is responsible. You know, it integrates all of us together. This leadership is listening. This is doing the right thing. So, I
want to personally congratulate Mayor Sakamandi, Committeeman Stler, and every member of this committee who stood firm, asked hard questions, and refused to set up for a plan that didn't protect our town. >> You fought for public health. You fought
for fiscal responsibility, and you fought for the future of Melbourne. Tonight, Melbourne proves that we can meet our affordable housing obligations without sacrificing safety, integrity, or well-being of the people who need housing the most. This is a win for
public health, not just for Milbour and a win for environmental justice. As a clinical trial operations manager, I deal with cancer patients all the time. And thank you for choosing the path that keeps Newurn safe, strong, and equitable
for generations to come. Thank you. Yes. Good evening. I'm Fran Denmark, also known as Fran Feld. And >> the other Mrs. Don't tell that. >> Um, well, first I have to say that I'm a
43y year resident of this town, which is not I can't even believe it myself, but um, it's true. And it wasn't until the last few years that I got really involved in town politics because things seemed to go pretty well until we had the complete streets. We won't get into
that right now. I thought that was bad. Then this happened and I was on the famous Zoom call. Mr. the other Mr. Fel was on that call when the lawyer we had at the time in his little Zoom box said that no, it wasn't true that he told the
attorney we used to have that the town shouldn't be told about this project. We were told by the that township committee that are all not one of them is here tonight for whatever reason. I can't imagine. One of them even was carried out of town
to feathered on a plane. But the truth is I could not believe that the lawyer had a pla to tell us that the law that to well that the TC told us that the
lawyer said that we shouldn't know any of this any of this before they signed on it dotted line. I I was really shocked. I don't know. I expect people who take public office in a town
like this to know how to have good decisions, act on our behalf, and it really taught me that I better keep my eye on everything. Not that I know everything, but just what the heck is going on in this town. So when Bennett
Frank came along with the campaign promise that they would see this thing through the end, so we would not have 100% affordable housing, which we used to call a housing project back in the day in the 70s when I was a social worker.
These things were considered horrible and they had to be torn down, but we were going to build one. So that was that was huge. And I want to thank Frank and Ben and to all the other people who might be watching this now or later on
YouTube. Um those people who said this couldn't be done. Um I'm sorry, but uh I I couldn't vote for you. I left vote the people who I previously voted for. I
gave up on them. And if they were here and had gotten elected instead of bed and Frank, we would be building on it on the dump. Exactly. >> My name is Fred Lieber and I live in Short Hills. I just have three brief comments. Uh number one, the settlement
vote tonight uh feels rushed. Fu. Uh, it was announced on July 27th and two days later it is up for a vote without adequate discussion and review by the township citizenry and other key organizations.
Need I need I remind you of all the anxiety, acrimony, and hard feelings caused by the most recent referendum and complete scripts. At the very least, has the planning board been consulted for such a large project with serious ram
ramifications for our town's future? Uh, point number two, the Rimback property is the town's most valuable piece of property because of its location in the heart of the downtown. Settlement calls for a mixeduse project
of 75 affordable units and 18 market rate units. Who would be willing to pay market rate in a development where over 80% of the units are designated for affordable housing? With the advent of Amazon and home shopping, there's no
guarantee that ground floor retail will be at full occupancy. The supporters of the proposed settlement emphasize the cost savings of the town of at least 11 million because remediation and relocating the DPW will
not be ne necessary. Nevertheless, there are always hidden costs and equally important opportunity costs. I think we should be asking does the rimback location satisfy the best use criteria for the town? careful study may reveal
that the Rimback location uh could be used for other projects that will generate even more revenue for the town. And finally, point number three, why not have all the possible sites uh for affordable housing been explored?
Why not convert the temporary town hall into a four-story affordable housing complex that could have more than 75 units? This location has several advantages over the rimac location. It would not lose government subsidy since it is not a fixed use project. The
recycling center BPW yard would remain intact at the present location and it is walking distance to the supermarket and stop. Thank you for your time. >> Good evening everyone. banka, president of number hope you can hear me. I would
like to thank the leadership of our mayor bank as well as the leadership of our mayor Frank as well as councilman Ben W and Jamie
for considering the people's voice in this redevelopment project and most importantly putting the we the people in front of all these development and negotiation with RBM. I know for a fact
that it has been a ongoing process and we do need affordable housing and we have been able to meet that by maintaining the safety and environmental standards and not relocating the town. I would like to thank our leadership of
the council council and most importantly your patience and perseverance as a doctor. Kudos to you and your team. Thank you. Good evening. David Bradford. I live in Short Hills. Um, first of all, I'd like
to thank the uh committee members for all the hard work in this uh for listening to the uh community. And now having seen the presentation and understanding all of the constraints you were dealing with with the judge, the agreement with the RPM and all that,
this looks like a a pretty pretty darn good deal. probably uh yeah would would I have preferred that they not use that this site of course but given the constraints we were dealing with I think we had to I think that's as good as we going to get um given those things I did
have a couple of questions and these may be answered in the larger document um forgive me if if they are um how many stories is this project four stories um the two the 21.85 85 million that's listed as the gap. Is
that a cap or is that an estimate? That's an it could be high. What is the process to make sure that we keep a a lid on that? A live keep control of that so it doesn't go wild. >> We're gonna answer all the questions
after public comment. >> Okay. Um, and well, I'm sure should I put the third question out there? Yeah. >> Um, when once this goes through the planning board and goes back to the town
council, whatever is approved at that point will be done as of right. There won't have won't be further variances or that sort of stuff. >> Put that on the record. Thank you. >> Eric Osman, Short Hills resident, stated by cynical, skeptical, apathetic
residents, hundreds of them, when we approach them in town, at the dump, or at their home. All of them resigned to defeat. Here's what they said. Isn't the dump a done deal? We have to build affordable housing, don't we? Lots of
properties have been remediated. So can this one. Litigation will cost too much. No New Jersey town has ever won a litigation like this. We are viewed as a rich town. What court is going to want
to help us? Now, let's look at the excuses from township committee members, all five of them Democrats, who served and voted unanimously for the dump site as part of the settlement agreement in
2021 before Republicans Ben and Frank were elected. I point out parties because the town said last month thanks to Democrats deceptive campaigning that the town wants to know which team you
play for. Here were the excuses from Democrats on the 2021 settlement agreement. We had two weeks to negotiate. This was the best we could do. Some said we were forced into the deal. We had no choice. Finally, in
unison, they chimed. We got into this mess because Republicans kicked the can down the road for too long. What a smoldering heap of oine defecation.
Ben and Frank's achievements don't just happen. The accomplished settlement announced this week wasn't obvious or pre-ordained. We needed to elect talented, dedicated officials to bring us and believe in this result. TC
members who could negotiate sophisticated deals, not transportation planners, not PR agents, and certainly not residential real estate brokers. Real thinkers who had negotiated highly
complex transactions in their business. That's frank and that's Ben. In addition, we had to overcome all the negativity in town, all the doubters, skeptics, opponents to bring this unprecedented settlement to you as
residents. Next time Ben and Frank and their supporters knock on your door, approach you in town, bring literature to you to educate you, absorb it, believe it, discard or ignore it at your peril. To
all those who voted for Ben and Frank three years ago, thank you. To the rest of you who couldn't bring yourselves to vote Republican, November brings you a chance to change to vote for Benny Frank. Yeah, if I may certainly can bring up
any comments and you can certainly uh address what committee men you would like to thank for their efforts but there is to be no electioneering no talk about the November election at this meeting. It's not appropriate at a public meeting. Sir, you're out of order and it's it's against the rules and you
knew that when you stood up there. My name is Eric Seaman. I'm a uh Short Hills resident. I've been a Short Hills resident for uh 20 over 20 years. Um as as proof of that, I'm wearing all my Michigan swag. I just fit right in. Go
blue. There we go. Go blue. Uh I have no I have no written comments. I have no speech. I don't even think I'm going to take the three minutes. And I really doubt that I can match that energy level because I'll do something here. Uh, as I said, I really like it here. I've been
in town for a while. I run into the 5K every year, whether it's the investors Cup or the President's Cup, I run the 5K every year. Um, and over the past 20 or so years, I've seen a number of things that have just reflected so well on the towns. And unfortunately, more recently,
I've seen things that haven't reflected that well in the town, including some work related to some of these fair housing issues. I mean, I work in town as a position in the commons and I'm witness to this construction which is literally casting a shadow over my place
of work that encroaches on the street. And that housing project is only second in its demoralizing effect to the dump. And so when I received notice that there was a settlement, I was able to have joy
again in the town of what I've been accomplished. And I so I just want to really say thank you to everybody sitting in front of me for all the efforts that you've that you've made. But more than that, now that we've gone through been walked through all these details, I have so much more respect for
your perseverance and obviously in particularly for Frank Sax and Ben Stoler for your efforts and it makes me so glad that I was able to support you previously and I I look forward to all your good work in >> Thank you council for reminding
participants about day forum. That's all Milbourne resident. Um I just wanted to quickly respond to the the press release uh that was shared on Milbour alert, Milbourne Instagram page and also by the mayor on Happy Milburn Facebook page, Township with Milbourne Facebook page
and Milbourne Township local politics page. Those are the ones that I'm part of. I may have been posted. Um but I just want to caution us before taking this victory lap. Mayor Sacramento, when you ran for office three years ago, there was a Facebook post made by your campaign
September of 2023 stating, quote, "Milburn is under construction. It's time to stop the overdevelopment, quote, Stler and Sakamandy for Township Committee." End quote. You're now on the verge of signing an agreement, which you've only shared mere hours ago with the public. It plans to allow the
developer to construct 24% more units to our downtown and has already agreed upon an prior settlement. This is not consistent with your promise. I learned 45 minutes ago that this site has been known since December of 2025 based on the presentation. Why was this not
shared in the spirit of transparency? One of your key promises, two and a half years of minutia uh using uh Mr.'s uh presentation uh was just shared to us in 45 minutes. You said in each of your own
social media posts from this week, quote, "The settlement ends over two years of litigation and protects taxpayers." End quote. Mayor, are we really to gather here and congratulate you on ending the litigation which you began. Your affordable housing landing page on the township website claims that
the alternative proposed sites were to be on town land. That was not the case because we just purchased the Palm Salon site for $1.75 million. Another cost. The new housing site is at the heart of our downtown, making it likely one of the most
valuable pieces of real estate in our township. This proposal now gives it away for mixeduse development, which means we lose the opportunity to leverage grant funds that could have otherwise been available if a 100% affordable building was constructed. I'm not saying the nine main streets would
have better sight, but I'm just saying the transparency and overdevelopment which you promised do not seem to be delivered here. Um there's a lot of unknowns. I wish we had been given the opportunity to engage in a process which involved the community
members as promised. Thank you for your time. >> Good evening. My name is Sher Bill. I support the project but I think we should correct some material errors and admission from the presentations. Uh first
you look at your page. This process began on July 30th, 2021 when there was a meeting called on shortened limited notice. I was the only resident there who brought this to the attention of the
public. It's outrageous that we don't disclose what happened after the meeting where I said this is going to be shut down because you violated our first amendment rights which we didn't discuss tonight. Nor did we talk about the due process
clause. We didn't mention what happened on September 17, 2021 when Judge Gardner at the first case management conference shut down attorney Falcon for attacking my professional character, integrity, and professional competence. You don't
mention what happened in October 220 2020 when Governor Cody stood in front of this the former township committee and said you broke the law by not allowing public to have public comment. You didn't mention what also happened at the
first conditional compliance hearing which Judge Kamura. She got frustrated with me who was the township at that time was fighting the motion from concerned Melbourne residents to intervene in the matter. Vote the incumbents out if they caused
the problem and we did. I would like you to look at your chart for the cost. I think you should add in on both sides. What is the cost of the property if they got the dump? What would be the cost that we got? And also the cost of the
rim there. There's a narrative here that people don't want to talk about. When weire acquired rimback, people thought if you look at the master plan that they were going to build a new town hall there, but if you look at the fair housing act because of the date they acquired, we had to use it for
affordable housing. But no one ever mentions that. But I guess because I'm an attorney, I raise these issues. That's why I get sued by the accountable company. Also, let's talk about the impact of the title. We didn't talk about the long-term tax. Mr. Bowman
knows who I am. The mayor's firm had little problems when I was in Orange with Epstein Hardware, you know, with your other partners. >> I'm unaware. >> There is, you know, but I'm incorporating all my objection that I filed in the court. the objections I had
when we were going to approve the original pilot. I think a pilot, if you look at Judge Wente's opinion, has to be approved by ordinance because there's a discretionary legislative back. There is also a long-term tax abatement report that came out by in August 2010. We
haven't talked about the impact on the school district based on the pilot and using the HFA statute. Your time is up, but I guess we reserve the rights to Mr. Thank you. Hi, Carrie Stasper. Um, I live in P. Um,
I was so happy to come tonight because I just thought we were all going to be happy and celebrating. Um, that the last five years of strife was over and that we seem to have miraculously negotiated a new and better
deal for the town. Um but I guess a couple of people disagree but I was just wanted to come and congratulate you all. Um you know a lot of us were in those meetings back in 2020 and 2021 and saw all the
unpleasantness um that followed. Um, in that 5 years, most if not all, I think of the people who voted for the settlement have either said they're sorry they voted that way,
that there was a gun to their head, >> that they didn't understand what they were voting for, um, that they were misled by council. Um, so I don't think we're going to have any issues tonight.
And maybe it's because I've seen y'all for the past couple of years or, you know, no since you were sick. Um, or whatever. Um, but I just wanted to say thank you. Um, and I really did hope that the town could kind of get into
like a better place and we all kind of had a great time on the 4th of July. And hypothetically, if anybody that wants to know when October Fest is, it's September 26th. I wonder if anybody would like to sponsor or donate or volunteer. We would
love all of you. Um, and then just one tiny last thing that always annoys me. Um, could we stop calling the recycling yard the dumb? because a lot of towns don't have a lovely recycling yard where you can
bring your crap and you have to like pay to get it like brought somewhere and the guys there are like super nice and I just moved from one part of town to another and I used that place like a maniac for like months. Um so in the
spirit of like yay happy Milbour woohoo um and it's always a great day to be a Miller let's just start at the yard again. Ed Mer long time resident. Uh I'd like to thank you all for coming up with this
solution. I think it avoids a lot of concerns uh that I have. I think you know I sent you all a copy of a letter I had sent to uh the township committee in May of 2022 proposing the Rimback site uh suggesting
acquiring the one lot that was not privately owned and putting the uh uh the fascia housing on that site. I didn't get one comment from any member of the township committee uh to that
proposal. My concern uh uh is uh ultimately as uh council had touched on is uh the possibility down the road of toxic tor litigation irrespective of how well we
uh clean up that site. Uh first of all, I don't think the site could be uh excavated down to the bedrock because of the proximity of the train track. So, we may not have been able to do that. Uh the site right now, I think probably
could be effectively capped, but we know uh where it was used as a coyard that it has uh trace amounts of mercury, which is a toxin. Uh we've got the uh refueling station which would mean that
there would be volatile organic compounds uh that are present. While it could be cleaned up, well, I think uh at some point somebody and living in those uh apartments is going to develop uh
some type of cancer which could be linked however remotely uh to one of those toxins. and uh council would have a field day referring first of all to the site as the dump rather than a
recycling center uh that Milburn chose as an affluent community to put uh the affordable housing on that site rather than on another site elsewhere. So I
think that this avoids a lot of potential problems down the road. uh and I want to commend you for coming up with a uh a good solution which should put all of this all of these concerns to rest. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Hi Raj Pasi. I live in Wyoming part of Melbourne. Just wanted to commend everyone here and and say thank you. It seems like a going this is a great presentation. I think the PowerPoint was amazing. Well, well done. And uh it really seems like a good deal for the
township, much better location to deal with remediation and to save, you know, by my math, closer to $50 million with the true remediation cost. That's a that's a boatload of taxpayers money you're saving. So really commend you. Uh and I I think you you did the best you
could with a bad hand that you were dealt by previous administrations. So uh commend you for that. Uh just one thing, one request. I recognize sort of locked into a certain number of affordable housing units due to the past decisions
and it has to be four stories high. Just whatever you do, please don't make it look like Amy says I drive by with only 20% affordable housing. This is meeting obligation with much more affordable housing. So commend you on that. Congrats.
Hi everyone, Regina Truit. I live in short thank service as usual. Just one brief question. I was doing a little research on the rimach building in terms of contaminants which I know a lot of us are focused on. Um and I was wondering that when that building came down there was news that there was asbestos in the
building. So wondering if you've looked into the asbestos that's possibly on the site and also can you verify that there's are no other contaminants in the soil of this this proposed project. Um and the other question would be what is the school district going to be that that any children may be going to you
can look at the district map. Okay anyway thank you that's it. Good evening cyber. You know, I come to these meetings years now. I see a lot of the same faces. See a lot
I hear a lot of the same complaints. There shouldn't be one complaint tonight. Ben and Frank won years ago. We're not talking politics. They made a promise.
They achieved it. They accomplished what they said they were going to do. In life, there's people that are sayers. There's people that are doers, but there's not many sayers and doers. They were sayers and doers.
And now it's time that they get rewarded. And rewarding them rewards the town, all the residents here. What wasn't said by one of the commentators tonight
was that the elect the former elected people, appointed people, non-elected people, connected people were the ones that made this $1 deal happen
at the dump. Michael, our town don't. They decided it was a good idea. Harry said it the best here. One of the best. A lot of people said it the best.
You know, in life, it's better to think twice and act once, measure twice, cut once. They didn't think twice. I went to the planning board meetings. I went to the
zoning board meeting. Frank was picked on a little while ago. The mayor was picked on a little while ago that he talked about construction. But the person that talked here, one of the commentators, they were the ones
that created the construction. Nobody wants to talk about that. Nobody wants to talk about Beth McManis. Where did she come from? Who the hell brought her into this town? She went to the She went to the middle
school, stood up in front of the middle school, talked like she was professor, like a professor. She was telling us how good it was going to be. This was the greatest thing to ever happen to. We're
going to build a penant in your town. My family's from New York, Skyler Avenue. You ever heard of that? That used to be a premier neighborhood. Let me tell you, they killed you. Killed it.
So, I just want to say thank you for doing a good job, >> Mr. Cy. Unfortunately, your time is up. Thanks for doing I actually have a question. Um I've been told that I'm supposed to say I heard your thing about no electioneering and
that's fine but I'm told that I'm supposed to identify myself as a candidate. Is that true? >> Uh you just did but you don't have to. >> I appreciate it. I got a lot of grief the last time I spoke. Actually, I would prefer that you do not, but I think everybody's aware that you are a
candidate, but you certainly can make any comment you like and comment on any anyone up on the day. We just can't ask people to vote for you if you like. >> I won't do that. Thank you. >> Uh my name is Bill Brazelle. Uh I live in South Mountain. Um three years ago,
as some of you know, I actually endorsed Frank and Ben. Um I remember very well that they campaigned on one main plan. Stop overdevelopment. I've got the ad right here. They said, "Stop radical
overdevelopment and overcrowding." The main thing that they ran on. And here we are today with 18 more units than we would have had under the original plan. Perhaps most unsettling, while the
developer would have put $2 million toward remediation under the first proposal, under this one, Milbour's taxpayers are entirely on the hook for any remediation that may be needed, and we have no idea how much that might be.
We hear there isn't any, but no one has actually done the testing, so we don't know the answer to that. one of many unknowns with this project. But again, let's look at just the main fact. After promising for three years
that you would stop quote radical overdevelopment and overcrowding, your main promise, you are now giving the town 18 more units than we would have had otherwise. I am not a mathematician. I was an English major. But even I know
that 93 is greater than 75. The rest is noise. >> Thank you. Jonathan, I'm a short hills resident for 13 years. Um, I just want to make a few comments in support of this. I think
Frank have been done a wonderful job. uh on the process. Mayor Sakamondi has already told us you know why this is a little bit rushed but we did get a chance to speak on this unlike the last time which we decided and in terms of not having enough process we've had
process for 5 years we've had intervening elections where people are elected on this platform we've had endless discussion endless litigation um we've lost a couple of days to read the settlement agreement I don't think it's a big deal at this point I'd also like to address the statement that the new
site is the most valuable piece of ar uh real estate that's owned by the town. I don't know if that's so but I don't think that taking a contaminated site and building affordable housing on it and relocating department of public works somewhere else no one knows even
if it is the most valuable real estate that the town owns I don't think that that's a better alternative in this case and the thing that people kind of overlooked in what this is there will be litigation if you build on a contaminated site and somebody gets cancer in the future it doesn't matter
whether it's got anything to do with it or almost certainly point the town will be sued. >> So this is a much better option on the 18 extra units. Well, now we have a mixed development. We had to build 75 affordable units. We had no choice. So the only way we get a
mixed development, which everybody agrees is better than 100% affordable, and it's one of the biggest oppositions to the original project. Two oppositions. 100% affordable building on a contaminated dump site. two really bad ideas and these guys have got us out of those two really bad ideas. So again,
the alternative is worse. I voted for bank and friend. Bank and friend. I also voted for Frank and Ben. Daughter of the bank. That's right. Um, and I voted for them to stop exactly
this development. They did what they said they were going to do. So sometimes democracy works. >> And as the attorneys pointed out, it wasn't easy to do what they said they were going to do. And in fact, if it went to the attorneys, even at the end of the day, with all due respect, it
probably would have still been negotiated. Now, Frank and Ben went in at the last minute and got an agreement sorted out that otherwise would not have worked. So democracy works but you've got to vote for the right people. And the final thing I'll say is in so far as
the original process was concerned, I remember when we were told that we weren't allowed to see the agreement before it was signed and voted on by the town committee. That was told to us by our attorney that the judge had ordered that later. The judge came out and said he never ordered any such thing and
there's no order on the record. Jerry Hills res um was planning to say something but I going to scrap it but I will take this opportunity to call you out. Last night was our wedding anniversary >> and you sent an application table in
these documents instead of taking me out to dinner. How many years? >> That's a secret. Um, so and again, I had something prepared, but I'm just going to use this opportunity to read out
exactly what Mr. Gretell wrote in his endorsement three years ago. >> Quote, "This was particularly evident during the affordable housing fiasco. Decided in secrecy, the plan demanded, among other things, a building whose units would be 100% affordable. The cities of Chicago and New York learned
decades ago that segregating people into 100% affordable projects was harmful for everyone, especially the tenants. Now, Milbourne's Township Committee was ready to repeat those city's old mistakes without even consulting us, its citizens. That is, it was ready to do so
until Frank, his husband Jerry Kung, thank you, and a number of others sounded the alarm. It became clear to many of us that a township committee funded and run by Democratic Party Pubas in Essex County was doing this town no favors. I support meeting our statemandated affordable housing
obligations. I want affordable housing done right. Frank and Ben will work to make that happen. Now, Frank and Ben were working up until last night to make that happen. Hence, no wedding anniversary dinner. But what's important to point out is now that Mr.
Now that some members of the public are being funded by the same Democratic party who buys in Essex County, those will not be named because I don't want, you know, get in trouble here. Um, it seems their position has been reversed on the issue, but you know, it's interesting because when you're a candidate, you actually have to provide
ideas rather than just cast dispersions at and when people actually put in the hard work and get things done. >> No, no, it's fine. Excuse me, Mr. Austin. I'm not talking council. I You're out of order, >> Mr. Brazil. You're You're out of order.
You're out of order. >> All right, we can uh I will allow Dr. Kung to finish. >> I did not think I said anything that controversial there, but >> you can continue. >> Okay. Well, you know, unfortunately, some members of the public who uh can't control themselves are now cutting me
off during my public comment. So, thank you for the committee for all of your hard work on this. And Frank, I will take a rain check on Harry, president. Hey, all the accolades of Frank Council,
Jared, Mr. Tanner, the effort over the last couple of years, I thank you. If it's something that you had not done, probably something that I certainly would have participated in, but other residents do. So, as a county, we did it with the leaders, you know, top down.
That said, um I know there's comment period later. Um the process is my concern. Mayor, you've disclosed the last weeks. Yes, we've known this site been in play. There've been some information that's
been out there. um a reminder to when the up the resoning process and I'm not sure who was familiar with that at that time. Nobody paid attention to it and when it came to the planning board the residents went crazy nuts at the
meetings but they had very little say because the properties were very zoned. There's not a lot out on this project. I just heard four stories. It's the first time I heard that. you know, density, setbacks, articulation, you know, parking, height.
If they're going to be laundrying these apartments, I don't believe we're going to be in the last, if we want brick, if we want other amenities, this project can get much more expensive. That's just one project. Complete streets. Hey, I'm I'm the person with the election, other things that stop
that thing in its tracks. Great concept, bad plan. We still have East Mil Avenue to do and Essex Street to do the process again governing process wasn't dummy down to area need study or redevelopment process. There's a lot now in this new
plan that we don't know. Um third project was the Wells Fargo another one initiated a litigation Alex certainly very familiar with it. I made the Wells Fargo project a lot better. spot zoning was done by town council, some people that were on the
council at the time. Again, these repetitive deals done by the town council, the parking deck, the purchase of the Rimback storage site, which we're here for today. It was a kind of a cool old storage building. Maybe it could have been reclaimed. For those who don't
remember, it was demolished to allow more parking while we built the parking deck. That was the purpose we were parking cars and lot set. My point of this portion of of speaking for my last two seconds is you haven't done the due diligence.
>> Hi. >> Oh, let me know. >> Hi guys. >> I am You guys are rock stars beyond. Okay. And I want to talk about everybody sitting on the stairs. First of all, Frank and Ben, you led this charge,
okay? And I got pulled into your world because you are senior executives that are strategic people that know how to build a complete holistic business. Okay? It's very clear and you've accomplished in your careers and it's
very clear to me working closely with you and seeing what you do. I don't agree with everything you do, but you think through every piece of the process. You work your day job and you go home and you work on a town till 3:00 in the morning. You work on planes in
the Middle East and you actually get back to me and you come and you actually deal with my mini problems, okay? Whatever the mini problem on the street and I really thank you for that a lot. Okay, I'm not trying to play favorites here. And also to the rest of the country, Jamie, you're a rock star in supporting and getting on this team and
moving it forward. Amazing. A huge help. And also Dave and Michael, I know that you're going to go in agreement voting with this because you are also highly strategic business professionals. And I want to point out, thank you again for putting a strategic committee together
to look at strategy for overall strategy for our town. We need to look at it for the school system. I think that's another brilliant idea that came out of this committee. So thank you very much. I do want to talk about some of the grandstanding that Miss Zaul and Bill came out tonight to talk about because
let's talk about the planning projects that went on in this town. Okay, that's all was on the planning board when a lot of these went through and we had a lot of things that really weren't great like the Annie project. I don't understand why we don't have any design standards that go into places. How some things
literally four feet or seven feet off from a curb so you couldn't even ever widen the road. And if an urban planner makes a decision like that, it's a little frightening to me. I also think it's frightening when you have an urban planner driving the development in our town. Okay, that is tied into the
transit village projects at Amtrak. That's concerning to me, you know, I I really have to say. So, let's look at that was actually decent building metropolitan. How did that happen? We kept when we kept the royal royal a-hole out. How does something that ugly
actually happen? Okay. Thank god it's but it's it's part of our entrance into our town. You see it. It's there. It's visible. It makes you not want to enter the town. It looks like communist housing. I'm so proud of what you guys did. I'm sorry that I can't talk talk
more, but you guys undid the mess that I weren because they did not have the experience. running a juice bar or a tiny retail business is not the experience that somebody at a strategic executive level has. And you guys have
that and I really really I really thank you. I'm just going to keep talking for five more seconds. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> My name is Rob Friedman. Uh I do I also want to commend Frank and Ben for an amazing job given the cards that they
were given and uh just want to thank you very quickly. >> I'm Ted C a longterm resident of Ashure Hills for 40 years. Um nice to see I think you guys have really gotten overwhelming support here and I and uh
you certainly deserve it. So I just want to echo that as well. Reminds me of a pop though you remember from Justice Cardo Supreme Court justice very famous justice he said at one of one of his uh writings he said at the end of it he said the victory is cheap and hollow
were not for the rigor of the game. I think that certainly applies to this effort here. Uh the victory was was not cheap and hollow. The rigor of the game proved that. So congratulate you guys. Well, I just have a few questions. I would love to know what the total cost of this project is going to be. I
certainly don't know that yet. Uh but I would love to know, you know, how much we're putting in versus how much RPM is putting into it. Um and what who handles the cost overruns if there are any. Uh the second thing is what, you know, it's been raised here a number of times. What
input does Milbert have into the design of this project? I really hope the planning board gets very involved and I assume we will be able to get some feedback on what this thing is going to look like because we have some horrendous building as everybody's pointed out around us and just killing the town. So hopefully this will be look
a lot more like the Wells Fargo building which I happen to like a lot. Um and this third thing I have is what is Milbour's ongoing uh interest in this project? you know what is our ongoing liability of the project if it happens to go underwater or does get into
financial problems what is our where's our interest and where's our liability for the future of this of the project those are a couple questions I had thanks Good question. >> I am Dr. Reea. I've lived in this town for over 67
years. As a taxpaying citizen of Milurn shorts, except for my military service 1967 to 70, I'm asking for full transparency of the affordable housing issue.
We use the term our obligations. Are we the citizens of Milbourne shorts responsible for the sins, the omissions and the com and the commissions of our prior township committees and
administration? Talk about fair housing. What I would like to do is to point the finger or to say that we are who we voted for. We are who we voted for. But I want full transparency
on the real estate managing entities and the builders exactly who they are, where they are, and what they're doing specifically related to the 1031 exchange concept. I also want to know
about the depreciation of property, the accelerated depreciation of property that is used by these entities. Just as we have a fair share in the obligation for affordable housing, so do the
developers and so do the real estate marketing uh entities. Thank you. Is >> there anyone else from the audience? >> Sorry. Sorry. Can I turn on your video, please? Thank
you. >> You are muted. We cannot hear you. >> You're muted, >> Mr. Gaya. If you can hear us, you're you're on mute. We cannot hear you. >> Let's go next person. >> Yes. Mr. Gay, you fix your technology.
You're welcome to come back. >> He's on. >> We can hear you now. >> Sorry. >> Hello. My name is Sanjie Van and I live in Melbourne Short Hills. I served on the Milbour Township Committee from 2020 to 2022.
So you can talk about Nine Main Street firsthand. There's a lot of misinformation and incomplete information floating around today. I'll revise some facts on them. Nine Main Street settlement in 2021. There was 75
units 100% affordable. Project site was the existing DPW parking lot and a small open area. DPW building remained untouched. Only the salt dome and large vehicle parking were to be relocated and that
also to the leaf compost site on GFK expressway or GFK parkway. Relocation cost for that was under $100,000 because the move was limited to salt dome and vehicle parking. I don't know where that $11 million is being floating around
when it was going to be there. Environmental remediation estimated was from $800,000 to $2 million and that was per engineers presenting at the township committee meeting. Remediation plan also included
a thick concrete slab foundation to make it super safe. Township expected to receive about 2.5 to 4.5 million in state grants due to the project being 100% affordable. Total project cost estimated at that time was $9 million to
$12 million for 9 main Main Street. What we heard from some of the resident at that time was township sold the site for $1 to the developer after going through three years of lawsuits. What we have now final plan includes 75 affordable
units, 18 market rate units. Township is selling a more expensive site plus 1.7 million nails salon property it acquired for $1 to the developer. No remediation study completed. So potentially environmental issues still could be
there as well. Project is not 100% affordable meaning there is no state grant. Total project cost is now more than double, exceeding $25 million. Three years of lawsuit to stop overdevelopment and pull almost 1
million in lowest fee. If the township still ends up building 75 affordable unit plus additional market unit with no state grant and more than double to build, how's this outcome better? How is this a win?
So to me there is lot and lot of misinformation poured here but overall to all the people sitting on the DS here I really really appreciate you volunteering your service there but please be true to the people tell the
truth. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank God you didn't run. >> Oh my god. Uh next person online audience if you can keep your comments to yourselves. >> Hi Chris Hinrich 15year resident. I just like to thank Mayor Sackam Monday,
Command Stler and everyone who else who worked on this deal. It's a good outcome for us and I am fully supportive on the terms I I don't love the deal, but given where you were digging out of a huge
hole, it is amazing that you got this deal done. Someone with less intestinal fortitude would have given up a long time ago. this dump project when you the team made me aware of it is why I got involved in town issues. I didn't think
we'd ever get to this day and it it's just amazing that you got here. I thought the presentation that was put together was very well done. It boiled down a complex issue and gave us all the key points. One thing that jumped out at
me was the the talk by the attorney of how the resident signatures and voting really put momentum behind getting to where we are today. But it also made me lament that a month and a half ago we
rejected our Faulner form of government which had initiative and referendum in it which would have made challenging township decisions that much easier. Um, I I believe uh a lot of people said
special interests like developers would use those to force more development in my town. I thought that was a whopper until people stood up tonight and said Frank broke his campaign promise about overdevelopment in the town.
the the the same people are trying to throw up noise just just because anything Republicans do is bad or anything Frank does is bad. It is absolutely ridiculous.
Um I'd also like to say a lot of things but I'm trying not to be political here. I think the amount of disclosure is absolutely appropriate. These deals are complex. They take a
lot. You want to announce them as soon as possible. It's not always to share 100% uh with the public going along. For instance, you know, if we're trying to do fields and people know too much and they shoot off a letter to the EPA to throw a wrench in the works, those sort
of problems come up. So, I think you guys did it absolutely right. Thank you. Thank you. Two more. Can you hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> Hi, I'm Cheryl Dearis, um, Milbour
Church Hills resident for over 30 years. I just wanted to ask a couple I have two basic questions. One was around the costs. Some of them have already been asked, so I'm going to pair it down to um, how do you know the Palm site
doesn't need remediation? because now we're on the hook for the whole cost of any possible remediation there. And before RPM was responsible for, I believe, the first $2 million of that. So, I want to know if any testing has been done to that site and when is
that going to be done? When would we find out if we're on the hook for any of that cost? Um, also in regards to costs, I'm wondering when you look at the cost of the new plan, don't we need to consider consider that we've lost the grants that were available for us for
100% affordable housing? And is there any state money that we are eligible for now that we can't get those grants um in addition to the money we lost for all the legal fees? So that was my first
question was around costs and the second was I'm wondering if you have thought comprehensively about the impact on the downtown from this new development. There'll be additional cars uh that come with these apartments, loss of parking,
more kids in the schools. Um and did you consult the planning board um about this in regard to any of these issues? And if not, why not? Isn't that their job? Should you be asking them to
be reviewing this? Thank you so much. Anyone else? >> Uh, good evening. Dave Boyco, Milbourne resident for over wow 20 years now at this point. Um, not going to join the the Bill and Frank hagography or
criticism that's going on. I think there's just a couple of points I'd like to get made for the record. You know, one, the lawyer's presentation uh on how we got to this point uh kind of amidst decades of the town trying to get out of its fair share housing obligations,
which necessitated some unfortunate decisions a few years ago from the jam we were in. Second, the thing I'm really concerned about, which I didn't see in any of the documents, at least in the time I had to look through them online, was how the parking situation is going to be adequately addressed. You've got
93 units of of residential housing. You only have what seems to be 70 spaces for all 93 of those units. And by the way, 80% of those units are are low-income housing. So, it's not exactly a pure mixeduse facility. It's really 80%
uh how uh income restricted, but how are you going to accomplish parking for those people who live there, including some of the three bedroomedroom uh units which were identified in the plan and would certainly have at least one car each. And then you plan to have shops on
the ground floor. So, people who are going to visit those shops are going to need to park somewhere. And it doesn't seem that there's been a lot of thought, and I know Frank and Ben are capable people and can address this at some point, but somewhere in the plan that seems there should be more thought given to parking for the residents and for
those who would patronize those shops so that the town can eventually see the money come back from this that we hope to see. >> Thank you. >> We have one board from Good evening, Perry Erso Short Hills. I just wanted to call in and say thank you
very much. We appreciate on behalf of my husband and family, we appreciate all the collaboration, the time and effort that our committee uh town council has done for this effort. Um I know it's a a tough decisions and you're you're looking out for the best and I I think
you ideally came out with the best results. Um being on a meeting in January of 28th when Judge Gardner um we were fortunate enough to get it on the record that prior uh TC's actually um said it was uh Judge Gardner that
prohibited um them telling the uh the public about their terms. And in fact, we know now that that was wrong. And I'm you know just want to say thank you very much for doing your very best and trying to I know it's a lot of people that you're
trying to satisfy and you're doing the very best for the township and uh and the entire residents and sometimes you know we're all not happy with certain things. So I just feel a lot better that we can all and especially you five gentlemen can put your head on the
pillow knowing that you are not placing 75% or 80% or 75 units. Um you could rest easy at night knowing that you didn't put those families and their children at risk on a contaminated piece of property. So thank you for your time and effort and have a wonderful evening.
Good night. Last call for anyone online. >> All right. Um, wait. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Thank you. My name is and uh I'm also executive member. So my comments
only represents my own opinion very clearly that uh I moved from New York the big apple in 2020 that's so six years uh after living in the big apple in New York City for almost 20 years no
matter how dumb something may look I kind of get used to such d things but when I first learned about the dunk sides project after moving to me. My immediate reaction was still, "Wow, this
is really a dumb thing. I've ever seen even I lived in New York City for 20 years." Uh, I'm very glad it's finally behind us. Thank you. Thank you, Ben and Frank. Thank you everyone who you know
fight didn't give up for last five years for ending this very dumb thing I have ever seen. >> Thank you. Bill Kersh, Milburn resident. Uh, one thing if you can clarify for me in your comments, I'm not clear on exactly. So,
RPM is going to build this. It's going to cost a certain amount of money like how much are they going to put forward and is and is the gap funding the amount that we're paying to do it? So, what just where are the finances coming from? What's it costing us?
What's it costing RPM? Just, you know, if you can answer that in your comments. And the other thing, if there's some way to put solar panels on this building, that'd be a great way to start doing it in. Thanks. 33 year resident. Uh the idea of 75
minutes was that was moronic. No one could have. That was just dumb. Uh, as far as the parking, I think that could be a problem. Says approximately 80 parking spaces. What about handicapped spaces?
There'll be a number of people that are going to be older, seniors, and so forth. I think there should be thought about how many handicap spaces should be uh required and get a parking facility.
will be good and so forth and transparency as far as how the uh how the uh new facility should be managed, how many people should be required and that's something should be looked at
them because they have some issues with some other properties right now taking to court civil rights violations. They've lost some cases and you know they are who they are. They're a management company and they've
whatever they've been they've been in court, so to speak, and they've lost, but hopefully they'll do better in Thank you very much and have a good evening. >> Last call for final public comment. >> Final public comment, we will have a
second public comment period. Um, but seeing as there's no one else, I will now close the public comment period and we are going to take a fiveminut recess. audience. If you could please take your All right, we are going to start. >> Um, so we're going to start with the TC
responses to public comment. Deputy Mayor Costco, you can go first. >> Thank you, Mayor. Um they're all blending together because all of you were talking about kind of the same thing. Um but but but a couple
costs. Um there was a question about parking. I forget who answered who asked that question. Um but part of one of the parcels there's three parcels being uh given to the developer. One of them is a parking lot on the north side of Essex
where town car is parked in there. Now it's a town employee lot I think. Um, so that's a lot that's going to have parking, parking only. I understand. Um, there was a question by someone about the, you know, the um the timing of when
everything was released for people to review and I'm not happy with that either. I I think we could have done a much better job getting that information out uh so people have, you know, time to read it and really digest it. Um, I would encourage people though to read
what's there. Although listening to some of the questions, it looks like a good number of you have read things. Um I think any other uh there was a question about the cost. Do we really know the cost? And I think the honest answer is we don't know the
cost. Um I think part two of that question is we are on the hook for the cost, whatever it is. Um, so I think it's a, you know, it's too early to take a a victory lap uh on what the cost is going to be. We're just going to have to see what what it actually costs at the
end of the day. Um, I think that's that's the only comments I have. Thank you. >> Okay, Cohen. >> Well, I was I was going to say that about the cost. That's true. We don't know and we are on the hook for them. And if there are any overruns, they're
they're on the on the township. And now that it's not starting until they said they're in a breakground in 2028. So given inflation, you can assume the construction costs will be higher 2028 than they are today. But that's out of town. And I think most of it was a
statement. So you know, you certainly will make a matter. I'll read my own statement in a few minutes. Um, and I guess Mr. Kersh, I think it was who asked what is RPM putting up. They're not putting up anything. Um, zero. So,
>> yeah, they're not anything, you know, and if they and as the mayor explained, if they put something up, that would go into their cost if we would reimburse. So, they're not putting anything up. So, it's all in the town less whatever financing they can be a
>> All right. Um, >> sure. Um, thank you for everybody's comments. I think it's important to pay attention to the timeline and I think we've heard that through uh many comments tonight. Um the parking issue uh parking question I should say was
answered. Um I like uh Mr. Esper's comment with regard to calling it the yard. Maybe there'd be a more fun name for it, but uh the name dump has has stuck. Um if we can have a contest for that, Mr.
McDonald. Um I think um you I just want to address some of the comments about you know the past and talking about um overdevelopment. This project was forced
on the township um and there was no choice to build these 75 units as we saw and the choice of the township committee was uh under this leadership was to um have an integrated development not an exclusionary development. These these
had to be built. So any you know insinuation that this is further overdeveloping the town we had to o this was already overdeveloped by prior this was how we managed this development and you know to criticize the new
development presented tonight. It's ironic because um you know some in particular miss you know mentioned on on overdevelopment um you know what about being a bystander through the nine main street project and uh you know the bonus
project of uh Annie says and Woodmont uh and the density of those projects that we now see one in actuality on the corner of Milbour Avenue um and Essex Street um in the South Mountain neighborhood that did not have that was
a bonus project in the Woodmont project which we're still talking about this was a project that was mandated and so in our best effort we are mitigating the impact of the development on multi multifront entrances from a flooding
standpoint you just heard the response on parking um integrated uh retail space so this is this is not contributing to the overdevelopment that was not already uh assigned it to us.
Um see in situation that it was rushed. Um this process was was not rushed. if we we were we we were rushed and um you know
in order to make a court date um such as a uh August 12th and not be caught in a quote unquote snowstorm uh as was indicated several years ago for why we did not uh meet our deadlines. Um, we
wanted to be good stewards of the township and uh and take action in a thoughtful and uh um proactive way. Uh which is why this is being up for approval tonight. Um let's see.
Uh let's see. You know, there were comments used tonight on stigma um that I think are really important. You know, entrance and exit from this property, the loca meaning nine Main Street, the prior property and location to the middle school and the train station and the
children that would be walking out of there. Um the, you know, the common name of the dump. Um, you know, that's a that was a really really big big uh sticking point for this township committee and um being
able to uh build on a different site without those stigmas uh is is forward thinking um and is care for all residents and I want to just emphasize that that the stigma really is a big big sticking point in this development that
we are correcting. Um, and I just want to say thank you so much to Frank and Ben, you know, the whole township committee. Uh I'm not even thanking myself to the full extent, but to David and uh Michael and myself and in particular to Frank and Ben who with
driving force, the hours spent as we heard 5:00 a.m., you know, calls with attorneys, negotiations, getting in the room, um you know, sticking this through, um being the driving force, credit where credit's due, um you know,
and uh so I just want to emphasize that and I'll have further comments later. Thank you. Seller. >> I'd like to thank everybody for coming out, giving your public's comments. I appreciate all the accolades. Um for
everybody gave a cogent statement. Thank you so much. Uh and we understand some of the comments. I'm not going to go into everyone as I usually do. I just uh I have a statement I'm going to read uh uh talk about later on the u on the uh
transaction on the settlement etc. Um, I find it rich just find it rich that former TCA members who are in my opinion in my opinion now I sat up here for almost three years were either incompetent or complicit or very much
both. I mean honestly so we've got to a great place. It took a lot of work, a lot of effort, blood, sweat, and tears. It's a lot of hours. Um, and it's a major accomplishment accomplishment for this town. uh no one's really ever had this type of
win uh as it pertains to fair share housing and such and we are meeting all of our fair share obligations. Um it took a lot of a lot of effort on all of our part. So >> thank you. >> All right. So first off I want to thank
everyone that came out and and praised uh us. Um, I was overwhelmed by the praise for be. Uh, but I would like to point out that this was a team effort. You know, we couldn't have done it without the full committee. Uh, and and I will say, you know, since, uh, Ben and
I took office, Michael Cohen did a 180 and he came on to the right side and decided to start fighting this project. Uh so I'm I'm very >> and and David was there with us uh as soon as he took office uh in in fighting
uh this. So I do think we should give everyone on the TC credit. Um that being said and I think this has been localized. Some of us were a little bit more intimately involved with the negotiations than others. That's to be
expected because can't have five people all in a room at the same time because that'd be a quorum. So, um, all right. Another thing I just want to point out up front, construction costs of the two projects are similar. We had our financial experts take a look at what it
would cost to build these projects. They even factored in, you know, 10% overhead. And these estimates were described to us as a worst case scenario. And I assume that they took into account when this would actually get built. And so all that's built in.
And that's, you know, right now if you you have the presentation uh and you look at the financial slide, you can see that the gap is the difference between the two projects is about a million dollars. Where the real cost savings come in is that we don't have to build uh and replace DPW. And and I'll get
into that, but um all right. So, first off, Hyen, um, thank you so much for coming out and speaking. You were there at the beginning of all this with me in 2022 and, uh, it was fantastic running with you and, and I really appreciate
you fighting, uh, alongside me at that time and, uh, you know, supporting uh, us for all these years. I think you make some some great points. Um, Missfeld, um, I I appreciate you
pointing out, uh, how the prior affordable housing council was shown to have basically lied to the public. Um, you know, what I find interesting is once the TC finally, uh, you know, and this was before my time, that the TC
finally fired Mr. Buzzac as the affordable housing council, um, the planning board did not. And uh the uh the person who was the chair of the planning board I think is sitting in the room. So I won't mention her name, but I think you can figure out who that was.
So I find that kind of interesting. Mr. Lieber, um you claim that the Rimback site could be used for other projects. Okay. Well, the settlement agreement that we were bound to by the decisions made by the people that were in power in
2021 forced us into a situation where we could either build on the dump or we could build in another site downtown. So, it would not be feasible for us to go and build the project anywhere outside of downtown because that would
violate the parameters of the settlement agreement that we are bound to. And the court made that abundantly clear. It must be in the downtown. So saying there's other sites we could have considered, please come back during second public comment and tell me what other downtown
sites were available and buildable that we could have considered. Um, and also you also mentioned that this was rough. Look, this was not rush. We've been working at this for years now and anyone that's been paying attention these past few months knew that we were
working towards a deal. Anyone that looked at court filings or attended TC meetings a few years ago know that we already presented the Rimback site as an alternative site to the court. Now, they ultimately rejected it at the time because
they had some some issues with it and were relying on the testimony from RPM that we intend was improper. But now RPM is on board. See, RPM wasn't on board then because we were trying to exclude them as the developer and get a different developer. So now that they're on board, um, you know, I don't think
we'll have too many problems there. Uh, as far as you bring up the point, well, who's going to pay to live in those market rate units? Well, that's supply and demand and that's economics. If those market rate units are priced appropriately, they will absolutely find tenants to live in them. Um, are they
going to compend the same rents as uh Annie says? I don't know. Maybe, but maybe not. There's a lot of people that would love to move to Milbour. Uh we have a finite amount of housing and there's a lot of people that would love to get into our school systems. So I
have no doubt that those market rate units are going to fill up. Uh because if they don't, the developer will simply reduce the price to the point that they can fill up. Um let's see. Mr. Bradford, um I think we answered
your question already. It's going to be a four-story building. The building directly across the street from it is four stories. Uh, and this is actually set a little lower, so I think it's going to it's going to fit in uh nicely. Um, yes, the the costs of both projects
are an estimate, but they're a fairly good estimate. uh our financial specialists spent a lot of time uh working on that and certainly um you know there'll be monitoring of of the costs along the way and RPM is going to have to show us receipts uh along the
way as well. Um Mr. Oman, you give a very spirited public comment. Uh I would ask maybe curb your enthusiasm a little bit. Um, this is all. So,
you made some claims uh that Ben and I uh a few years ago promised to stop overdevelopment. Well, that's exactly what we did. We took on the round four affordable housing obligation the most open and transparent manner that this town and I think many other towns has
ever seen. And we pushed back on developers that wanted to put hundreds upon hundreds of units in our town. One developer came at us and they wanted 800 units. I think we cut them down to like 200 units. So we have done a lot to
combat overdevelopment. But what we couldn't do is stop the 75 units from going in because our predecessors agreed to that. It was foolish then. They shouldn't have done it, but they did it. Okay? And so our hands were tied with what we could do in terms of a deal. And
furthermore, if we wanted to not have 100% affordable housing, which I think plenty of people pointed out tonight is the wrong way to do affordable housing. Obviously, you have to add some market rate units. But we didn't go and add like hundreds of market rate units. We added 18.
And what's interesting about that is the typical formula for an affordable uh integrated site is you have 80% market rate, 20% affordable. Well, we inverted that. Okay. And honestly, I think that the fact that it is mixed income and
mixed use is a huge win. Um and then you also uh said something about the the Palm Salon. Uh it that was townowned land. We acquired that a few weeks ago. Uh, we authorized that and and we're closing on that soon. Um,
let's see. Also, I find it ironic that you would come up and try to cast dispersions on this plan when you were the head of the planning board that approved the disastrous third round housing element and fair share plan. You
approved Annie says your handprints, your fingerprints are all over this deal. You could have pushed back on it. You didn't. And now we were stuck with things we couldn't change and we made the best of a bad situation that you
helped create. Mr. Feld, uh, you brought up Senator Cody. Um, we actually looked into that. What he said that night was incorrect. Um, you you you do not have there is no legal requirement that a township have public comment prior to taking official
action. they are required to have a public comment and I think Mr. Caner can attest to this because this has come up in the past but I just wanted to make that clarification but this township committee not only do we have one public comment but we have two so we definitely
give residents a fair chance to um let us know what they're thinking. Um and then you said something about you know the town suing you. I'd like to point out that those lawsuits are counter suits to the suits that you bring. So, I just want to make sure everyone's clear. We're not going out suing residents on a
proactive basis. It's when they sue us, sometimes we have to counter sue. Uh, Mr. Strasburg, thank you so much for your your uh kind words. Um, and uh, also thank you for the shout out to Brotoberfest. This is going to be my
club for Rocktoberfest. I hope to see you all there. It's a fantastic event. And uh if you are able to make a donation, you really should because it is a fantastic uh organization that really uh the foundation is a fantastic organization that really helps our schools out. Uh and then as far as
renaming the recycling yard, uh perhaps after uh this campaign cycle, uh I I I will certainly pledge to uh stop calling it the town dome. Um Mr. from Baser. Um,
thank you for your your comments and and stating the inevitable that, you know, obviously if uh you had a contaminated site and residents live there, at some point someone along the way is going to get cancer and even if it has nothing to do with how it was remediated, there's
going to be a lawsuit. I mean, we we know that there's plenty of attorneys out there. No offense to our our council in the room, but there are attorneys out there that are sharks, and they're going to go after uh a paycheck when when they see it, and then and they will certainly
uh litigate. Um let's see. Uh Mr. Yasi, um you've asked about uh the remediation and what taxes that would have come out of. So, the remediation of the DPW site, the cost would have been
borne by the township. The settlement agreement required us to clean up the site. I don't believe RPM was ever going to pay to clean up the site. Um, and that would have come out of normal taxpayer dollars. We wouldn't have been able to use the affordable housing trust fund, is my understanding, to do the
remediation of that site. Um, but the with this new project, almost all of it is going to be funded by the affordable housing trust fund. And that is not funded by property tax. That is funded anytime, you know, a developer comes along and does a tear down, anytime a
resident comes along and does a significant renovation, they have to pay into this affordable housing trust fund. And it builds at a rate of about a billion dollars a year. So when you do a 30-year bond, it's basically going to be able to service the bond and and some of these other costs. And there are also
other things that we're obligated to do with that money. And I believe there's going to be enough in the pot. So, I don't believe there's going to be any uh property tax impact, but you know, that's contingent upon the affordable housing 12 fund bringing in the same amount of revenue, but given the fact
that this this town is known for tearowns and we seem to have more and more of them, I don't foresee that changing anytime soon. Um, Miss Truit, uh, as far as you know, when you take down a building, I believe you have to
follow the D regulations. So while I wasn't there, I'm assuming that all proper regulations were followed and when they removed the building, they properly took care of the asbestous. We have not seen any evidence. Uh we have no knowledge of there being any sort of
asbestous or any other contamination on the Grimback property. I think years ago there was some sort of initial assessment done. Didn't find anything. Uh so we know what was there before. there was a storage facility unlike the uh DPW facility which we know has
underground fuel storage tanks. We know the township buried contaminated soil there. Uh so you know there's a lot more documented contamination on the dump site. Uh and we don't have any documented contamination on the on the uh rimback site. So I'm not too
concerned about that. And as far as what school district that would go to, that's something that you're going to have to ask the EOE. Um, let's see. Uh, Mr. Sbert, yes, you made a great point. Essentially, the people that came before us tied our our hands, and that's
why we had to convey the land for a dollar. We didn't we didn't have a choice. Um, that's that's not something that, you know, we would have done if it were our choice, but we were bound by the sins of the past administration. Uh, and as far as where Beth McManis came
from, I I remember at one meeting Maggie Miggins uh infamously said, "Well, she came from Madison." So, uh, that's the view on that. You may or may not remember that meeting. Um, >> Mr. Riselle, obviously, it's been stated
there's no requirement that you identify that you're a candidate. Um I you know I I touched on this when I responded to Missall's comments with regards to overdevelopment. You know those of us on this day is here have done a lot of work to thwart overdevelopment especially in
the fourth round. We are we minimize the amount of total units that have to be built while still fulfilling our constitutional obligations. And not only that, we actually went and joined a federal uh suit with 30 other municipalities to try and fight those
unfair regulations. And Mr. Stler and I were personally named in this in the suit. And that went all the way well didn't go completely to the Supreme Court, but the Supreme Court got it and refused to hear it. So we fought that uh and we fought the good fight on that.
Um, so we have done everything we can to minimize overdevelopment and compared to the job that was done uh in the third round, I think we did a fantastic job. So I'm very proud of of getting that done. Um, you also, you
know, pointed out that we're going to have these additional units. Well, you know, either you believe that 100% affordable housing is not the right thing to do or you think it is the right thing to do. If you think it is the right thing to do, then okay, fine.
Criticize us for the 18 extra units. But if you, like me, believe that that's the wrong way to do affordable housing and that you should have a mix of income levels and and you should have, you know, an integrated development. We had to add more units. We couldn't get away
from that 75 number. We've made that abundantly clear. So, I hope everyone in this room understands that. Um, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. Um, so we did the best we could and uh I think we did a great job and perhaps at future public comment you can clarify
whether you were advocating for 100% affordable housing and if you think that's the right thing to do. Um, let's see. Dr. come. You know, I I apologize for, >> you know, we I was a little busy uh as
as you well know, putting working on the presentation, emails back and forth. Um you know, this really did come down to the wire. Uh it was very challenging working with RPM uh and their attorneys. There were a lot of revisions and this
thing didn't come together until the very end. And that's unfortunately why we weren't able to release the documents until until we were able to. Um, but you know, I think anyone that was paying attention saw this coming. I announced it at the last TC meeting. Um, so I I
don't think this should come as a surprise. And given the fact that the majority of people that came out tonight uh spoke in favor of it, I think speaks volumes about this. And I couldn't help but notice that most of the people that had something negative to say were either political candidates or uh county
committee members of a of a local political organization. Uh let's see, Mr. Heler. Um not certain if there's going to be laundry, but I do know if there is laundry, then that contributes to the pilot revenue. I remember seeing that in the documents. Uh and then
obviously we're going to follow the proper process. the planning board's going to get to review this as they do any other application. A lot of it is as of right. Uh so there's not going to be a whole lot of stuff that they need to worry about and argue about. Um but it is going to go through that that process
and the planning board will get to weigh in. Furthermore, uh in a closed planning board session because this was due to ongoing litigation, I was able to inform the planning board of what our plan was. And uh you know, I think Mr. Cohen can attest to this. Everyone that heard that
thought pretty good job, pretty pretty good idea. Uh they were happy with that. So, um they were they were aware of what was going on. Um Miss Best, uh thank you for your praise. I'd like to point out you mentioned the Metropolitan. That's
not in our town. We didn't have any say over it. I agree. It most likely it's an eyesore. you know, perhaps 20 plus years ago, if the residents here didn't fight that stop and shop or whatever supermarket was going to go in there so hard, then we wouldn't have the Metropolitan there. But, you know, the
past is the past. Uh, let's see. Mr. you wanted to know the total cost of the project. Um, that was in the presentation. Uh so right now the estimated total cost project repeat it
almost 26. >> Yes. So the total cost of the project we have the estimate at 25.875 million whereas the nine main street project would have cost $ 34.78 billion. uh all in uh and again the
affordable housing trust fund could be funding uh this project. Um see as to what input Milbourne has over the design of the project. Uh like with any project, we don't have a lot of input. You know, as long as they're
following zoning codes, as long as they're adhering to what's in the redevelopers agreement, you know, they have a pretty wide latitude of what they can do. But our planner did help uh did create you know the redevelopment uh agreement and uh I have full confidence
that our planner did a good job and thought things through carefully. I think by now he knows what we like and don't like in this community. Uh so I have a feeling that the end result is going to be a building that we can all live with. >> Uh and uh you know I think it'll fit in nicely there. Um, and don't expect it to
look like Andy says, um, and it will also go through the, uh, planning board. Um, Mr. Maniac, I don't know if you're still watching, but you know, you came on and you said some things that weren't true, and I want to I want to address
those. You know, you said, "Well, we sold the new property for a dollar." Well, with all due respect, that's because you put us in the position. You signed the original agreement forcing us to convey the land for a dollar. We didn't have a choice. You
signed an agreement saying the township would sponsor 75 units of affordable housing. That's on you. That's not on this township committee. Um we were just here cleaning up the mess that you created. Furthermore, as far as the grants are concerned, we
haven't lost out on any state grants. The reason that our gap between the two projects is so similar is because grants got renewed. There's new grants and in fact there's, you know, new grants that come out every day and part of the settlement agreement mandates that RPM
needs to go and seek out and apply for all of those grants that it can. Uh so, you know, the more grants we get, the lower the price will be, but there's plenty of grant programs and money available. Um, see Hinrich, thank you
for your kind words and uh for pointing out the irony of, you know, if we had the newer form of government, you would be able to use referendum to overturn bad ideas. Well, technically the initiative uh if uh if it was more than a month past the ordinance passing, but
six to one half dozen of another. Uh Mr. Harris, uh you want to know if the palm site doesn't need remediation. We don't believe that the Palm Salon uh property needs any sort of remediation. We know what's been there. It wasn't, you know, a coal facility. It wasn't an ice
factory like the dump was. Um as far as grants, I think I just touched on that. Um and as far as I I know, we were always on the hook for remediation in the original 2021 deal. The township was going to have to pay for that out of our
pocket. we wouldn't have been able to use the affordable housing trust fund to remediate that. So, moving to a site that doesn't require remediation is going to save us a lot of money. Um, you mentioned the impact of the downtown, but imagine the impact of the nine main
street pro project. It was going to have a single uh entryway and egress onto Main Street, which already is a traffic nightmare. It would have been a disaster for our downtown. it was not the right project and and uh
I'm I'm very glad that we were able to work to undo the sins of the past. Um I'd also like to point out I believe you are the chair of the local Democratic party. So I I do wonder if some of your comments were political uh politically
motivated. Um Mr. Puo um you're you asked questions about the parking situation. Um, you know, according to our experts, the parking is sufficient. Uh, with the 80 parking spaces, um, you know, when you have a building in the heart of the downtown
steps away from, uh, transit, not everyone is necessarily going to have a car. Um, so in addition to the parking that we have, it's going to be on site uh, across the street across Essex Street, there's another small area that they're going to get for additional
parking. We also have uh you know for for the commercial tenant we have commercial spaces that are uh around. We have a parking deck that's not far away. There will be opportunities for for people to park in the downtown. Um see
uh Mr. Kersh you wanted to know about the funding. To be clear, RPM doesn't have to pay. that the way these affordable housing projects work uh is that you know when they're 100% affordable or they're mostly affordable, it's generally not the developer that's
paying. And it was the 2021 township committee that signed an agreement saying we would sponsor the project. So, they're the ones that put us on the hook for what we have to pay. uh we just worked with what we could to do the best
uh with a bad situation and I think we did an amazing job. Um Mr. Carlin uh mentioned the original plan was moronic. Uh I agree. Excellent point. Um and with that I will conclude my response to
public comment. I will now turn it over to uh Mr. McDonald in case he has any responses. Uh, I do not have any response that excer responses. >> Uh, thank you, mayor. Uh, I'm typically
brief and I know it's late, but I do want to say a few things as I'm not going to be making any further comments as I know all the DC members. Um, my my origination was I was brought in as a fair share housing council in 2023. Um, and at that point I have a very fond
memory of Mr. Stler who would come to every meetings and tell me what a terrible lawyer I was. Um what a bad job I'm doing and how he can't wait to get elected so he could finally get some good representation. 2024 comes in and they need a new
township attorney and I had a conversation with Ben and I said I think I know your position on me. He said no. He said, "You have one job and your one job is to stop a dumb project and if you do that, you're going to be successful." And I believe that you're the guy who
could do it. So, you know, I appreciate that confidence and and I remember that. And what made me want to speak tonight is when Richie Cyber got up and he may remember this. It was one of my first meetings as contract attorney. He got up and he said, "This is like David verse Goliath and you're David and we're going
to win and I believe in you." And I don't know if you remember those comments, Richie, but you know, I appreciate it in Ben and I appreciate them. Uh, now, um, Mr. Bowman did a great job of of of going through the efforts that, uh, the mayor and and Ben put into this and they really did and
and and Frank worked tirelessly on this. And now I find out, Sherry, that he missed your anniversary over that. So, you know, I don't know what I have to say about that, Frank, but you know, um, no, but he really did. And I think it's a real real commitment. But I also think what shouldn't be overlooked are the
efforts of of of also uh Michael Cohen who who did and and as the mayor pointed out, you know, in closed session, which the public's not privy to, um a lot of debate goes on and and Michael fights fiercely for this township. Uh he gets
his points across. This was just important to him as it was uh to the rest of the TC. Um and and and Dave Cosgrove uh he hasn't missed a court appearance. uh and before every court appearance, you know, he's a former lawyer. He gives me his advice. Uh he
looked over settlement drafts. Uh he gives me his opinion. Um and again, you know, he wasn't at the negotiations as Frank pointed out. Uh and not to take anything away from what Frank and Ben did in those negotiations, but we realized too. Um but certainly Dave
would give the benefit of of of his experience and I would bring that into those meetings and use that. And Jamie has just been the ultimate tree leader since he's been here, fully supportive of everything. Um, and again, without this group of five individuals, one
having faith in me and and again, everybody pointed out, uh, including Michael, including David, including, you know, the mayor and Ben and Jamie to fight and to lose and to say we're continuing to fight, um, is really great. And and and just lastly, on a personal note, you know, as a lawyer,
you try to achieve your your client's goals. um whether you agree to the goals or not, it it's your ultimate goal. But when your goals align with them, which is, you know, um affordable housing in Melbourne, but done properly, and you're able to accomplish those goals. So, I'm I'm very proud of the work that my firm
did. I'm very proud of the work that I did. Um all the court appearances, um standing up and asking judge to recuse herself twice is is not really an easy task. Um but, you know, we did that and and as Mr. Bon pointed out, I think, you
know, all that led uh to the success results. So, um you know, I'm very proud of this accomplishment. Um it was a long time coming. It was a lot of hard work and I and I appreciate uh this committee's uh confidence in me from the beginning. I'm happy that I was able to
see this the finish line. Thank you, Mayor. All right. Um, so now I'm a big vote. We're going to vote on the resolutions. We're in solution 26-152
resolution authorizing the execution of a global settlement agreement RPM development LLC fair share housing. Now we're going to have comments from the committee in regards to resolution 26-182. Now, I'm going to begin.
Four years ago, I was simply a resident coming home from the train station when I noticed a flyer on my car about the dump. It opened my eyes to what the township had agreed to do with a nine main street. Place 75 families on a contaminated public works yard, 100%
income segregated development. I refused to accept that this was the best Melbourne region. I started attending township committee meetings, noticed that residents were not being heard and then I joined with those residents and together we built a movement bring back professionalism competence to local
government. That disastrous deal from 2021 is the reason I'm up here today. November of 2023, the voters elected committeeman and me with a clear mandate stop project at 9 Main Street. We're elected with a twothirds majority. That
was a pretty clear mandate. That's what we were sent here to do. That's what we're accomplishing tonight. So, it took two and a half years. And I want to be honest about how we how we got here. We litigated relentlessly. And
it wasn't stubbornness. It was to get leverage. RPM and the fair share housing center needed to understand that this township was prepared to contest every issue at every level for as long as it took. That's the only language that was going to matter. So when Ben and I sat
down with RPM's principles and our professionals and council in December of 2025, the choice in front of them was simple. Reach an agreement with us or spend the next several years litigating against a town that would not yield, would not bend. They wisely chose to
negotiate. None of that would not none of that would have been possible without a united committee. In February of 2024, this body voted unanimously to reject the Nine Main Street redevelopment agreement, and it has held that line ever since. That unanimity mattered more
than people realize. It told the other side there was no crack here to exploit. Early in 2024, our own council told us that the odds of a different outcome were minimal at best. We went forward anyway because we knew we were right.
two and a half years of work from our professionals, from Ben, from me, and we have an agreement that is in front of you tonight. The very agreement that a lot of people said couldn't be done, especially given the constraints we were bound to by the poor decisions made by our predecessor.
You heard the terms in the presentation, so I won't repeat them. But let me tell you why they matter. This settlement saves the township millions of dollars, protects us from open-ended liability we would have carried for decades, and it creates affordable housing the way it's supposed to be done. Affordable housing
is meant to lift people up. You don't do that by putting families on a contaminated town dump in an income segregated building seated between NJ Transit on one side and a huge electrical substation on the other. You do it by putting them at the heart of the downtown in a mixed income building
between the hearth and our own town hall where the residents where the future residents and their children walk the same sidewalks as everyone else. So to the families who will live there one day, we welcome you to our community with open arms. We are happy to have you
in the heart of our downtown. This agreement is the product of hard skillful negotiation by Ben, by the professionals. I want to thank my colleagues on this committee for the confidence they had in me and Ben to get this deal negotiated. I want to thank our professionals for the technical work
that made an agreement possible. I want to thank the residents who refused to let this issue go. Tonight, I'm proudly voting yes and I strongly encourage my fellow committee members to do the same. Deputy Mayor Costco, do you have any comments? >> Yes. Thank you, Mayor.
Um, I'll start out at, you know, thanking everyone who's worked on this as well. It's, you know, it's been a long time. It's been a lot of work put in by by a lot of folks. Um, I am going to vote yes for this. Um, because I I think we need to to wrap this up. Um,
I do have some reservations. I have reservations uh in what this is ultimately going to cost us. I have reservations uh related to the indemnity clause. dem terms that are in the written agreement. Uh, and I have reservations as well as what it's going
to cost us to clean up potentially um the salon and the parking lot across the street which is contigious to the town yard. Um, so having said that um you know it's it's it's something I feel we need to do. I think that's in in the
best interest of the town. I do think it's a better site. Um and uh that's it. Thank you folks. Good evening, Co. Do you have any comments? >> I do. I'll read my statement. >> It is time to bring a resolution to this
multi-year project, and approving this project finally accomplishes that. Since 2024, we've spent nearly $1 million on legal fees with additional unaccounted costs still to come. In every single court case, we aren't just paying our own legal fees. We are putting the bill
for the developer, fair share housing, and the special master. Today, all that spending has not yielded a single win. It's time to stop the weaving. I'm relieved that we no longer have to relocate the front portion of the of the DPW facility. Moving the front half
might have forced us to relocate the rest of the site later on. Avoiding that route saves the township significant cost and disruption. That being said, this project is no panacea and we should be cleareyed about its drawbacks. Land and property values. While many objected
to giving away land for a dollar in the original proposal, we are we are repeating that approach here. Only this time, we purchased an additional property for 1.7 million just to hand it over for a dollar. Project composition. Concerns were previously raised about
the stigma associated with 100% affordable developments, particularly for children. If that concern holds weight and 80% affordable project does not meaningfully change that dynamic. Most importantly, it's financial uncertainty. What concerns me most is
the continued lack of concrete hard cost numbers, a problem that plagued both proposals. We know the DPW site requires environmental remediation, but we don't know what lies beneath the Palm Salon and the Rimback site also requires testing. Furthermore, because
this is no longer 100% affordable uh bill, we lose eligibility for certain state financing programs that are based on that requirement. Construction estimates are ballpark at best and any overruns will fall squarely on the taxpayers. Calling the proposed bond
ordinance a worst case scenario is overly optimistic and claiming the cost of the two projects are comparable is simply impossible to verify. Ultimately, I will vote yes tonight, primarily to put an end to this chapter. so our township can finally move forward and focus on the other critical issues
facing our community. >> Thank you. >> Point one quick point of clarification. Uh the way we have the settlement structured, if for some reason in order to get a particular grant, they have to be 100% affordable. They can condo out
that portion of the building. There's all sorts of creative ways that you can get around that restriction and RPM is going to be obligated to do so. So, I don't think we're going to lose out on any grant opportunities. And that's why our professionals uh that went and did
the analysis found that the gap between the old project and new project is a million dollars. It would have been much bigger if we weren't going to be able to qualify for those grants. >> Ser, do you have any comments?
>> Yes, I do. Uh good evening and thank you to all the engagement um from the residents and that's the engagement over the last several years. uh since um the original project uh Nine Main Street came uh to the table. You know, growing up here, I could have never imagined the
Nine Main Street project uh ever coming to the table. Um and I want to thank all who have worked diligently to bring uh this resolution uh forward. Um that's to all of my colleagues um and our professionals. And uh this is a cleanup
deal. This is a better deal. This is good governance based on the cards we were dealt. This puts res this puts residents first. Um and I will be supporting this settlement and look forward to um wrapping up um you know
all of this discussion. Um and uh I see Miss Strasburg in the audience and I think you know hopefully moving forward here it'll continue to be a great day to be a Milbert Miller. the yard. >> You stole it. Any comments before we
vote? >> Of course. Um, all right. Tonight, tonight we are voting on a settlement that finally ends one of the most difficult and expensive chapters in recent township history. The previous administration left us a dumpster fire of a project, pun
intended. In 2021, they committed no burn to those 75 units of 100% affordable housing on our DPW yard without knowing whether the land is even buildable, what remediation would cost or how we would move the salt dome, the fueling station, the snowplow
fleet, and the recycling center. They told the court the site was realistic. They had no real plan and no real number, dollar number for relocating the public works. That was the deal that Frank and I inherited on ran. When I started this process, u I was heading up
concerned Milbour resident, which is a group that we put together to try to get a voice at the table for residents. The judge told me based on our Milbourne Milbour form of government, we elect five committee members to be the voice of all residents. So you have the
opportunity to vote them out. the current TC. We did exactly that. In January 2024, a new township committee took office with a clear public mandate. Frank and I received 68% of those who actually voted to stop this dumb
project, among other formidable issues. After being seated and starting to address this project, kind of just putting my feet into the water, uh Jared told a funny story, too. All true, by the way. Uh along the way I, you know, I run big businesses. We've
sold businesses for over a billion dollars, a lot of employees. Uh I went out and looked for the best possible attorney that my colleagues could could give us to help fight this transaction. They gave me one, Joe Bman. So I called
him a couple times, never picked up. Called him once at 7:30 at night. He picked the phone. Hey Joe, how are you? Good. Introduced myself. who introduced me to him, etc. And I said, "Listen, you know, here's the fight we have on our hands. Uh, can I can I can I can we talk
to you about it?" You know, send me the documents. I'll take a look at it free of charge. Let me get some flavor for it and I'll let you know. Let's talk in a week or so. Week goes by, two weeks go by, haven't talked. I call him back. 7:30 at night, he's in his office
working. You know, they're one of the working. I said, "Joe, what do you think?" The story he told from the podium earlier is completely true. You have no chance. I've reviewed all the documentation. I don't want to just take We're expensive firm. I don't want to
just take your money uh and not be able to deliver. Okay. Thanks for the cander and honesty and bluntness, etc. Uh so you know I kind of moved on and as Jared said the whole time he's
fought very hard for us. Uh we continued to fight. Uh and as we got closer and through the process we realized we did need one more person and that to be that bridge. I called Joe up again. Actually I had Jared call Joe. Said Jared listen.
He doesn't want to do it. You got to convince him it's worth doing. and tell them all the progress we've made in the last couple years, why it's so important. Joe must like Jerry better than me because he said yes and came on the team
after a ton of progress going back and forth and such. We were making progress, but we didn't have the deal in hand, the transaction, the settlement. So I said to Joe, "Let Mayor Sakammani and I go meet these
guys uh face to face." Oh, not a good idea. Don't do it. Never works out. >> So I said, "No, this is what I do. This we we get we broker deals. We bridge gaps. Uh let's see if we can do it." And and and all kidding aside, Joe said, "I think that's a great idea. Let them see
the sincerity. Let them let them see the professionalism. and let them get a taste and a flavor for what you guys are doing. And for everyone in the room, I did call them out in that meeting for the attorney calling us inmates in the asylum. By the way, don't I'm not going to let that go now. I've let it go
because they've agreed to do a deal and actually sign it. So, uh I can get over that now. Um after meeting with them face to face, the rest is history. Worked out a better resolution for every party involved. The result is a settlement before each night. It moves those 75 affordable
units to a clean already designated site at Essex Spring in Milbourne as part of a mixed income mixed use development right in the heart of downtown. There anything better? It ends years of litigation. It meets our affordable housing obligation the right way. It integrates the community instead of
isolating on contaminated ground next to the middle school with unknown future liabilities such as what is happening in Kport and Ganas. Everyone seems to gloss over that. I honestly if you guys see what's going on in Keeport and in Gowanas the untold millions and millions of dollars of lawsuits that are going
out it's crazy. The same's bound to happen here. There's no you were nice use the word sharp Frank. I use another another name that's not quite as uh it's more of an exploitative. Um but this is what real leadership looks like and it's the same approach that has resulted in
true true results across the township. We've live we've delivered more athletic fields for our kids and we've driven crime down dramatically. I urge a yes vote on this resolution and ordinances before us tonight from my entire township committee. Sounds like
we're going to get them. I want to give a big thank you to Joe and Jess. Thank you guys so much. Um, I want to give big thank yous to Jared, Alex McDonald, Graham, Matt, Larissy, and all the town employees that
were engaged uh and helped us. And all the residents sitting here tonight who gave some accolades uh and helped us vote them out. Uh, Michael, Dave, and Jamie, big thanks to you. And to Frank, honestly, Frank and I work so close together. And we've had our hiccups. We've we've we've we've
worked well. We've worked well together. We've worked not so well together. Uh, and you know, the big thing I want to give is to Dave Cosbro. I was adamant that he wasn't going to be mayor. Frank wasn't going to be mayor. Cosbro pulled me, Dave, vote for me. He goes, "Frank's going to make a great mayor." Okay, I'm
voting for Frank. Okay, unless you vote for me, I'm wasn't going to vote for Dave Cosgbro. But anyway, Frank became mayor. And I can't tell you, I always judge people by I would hire him in my own firm. I would hire Frank in my own firm. I'd hire any of
these guys up here on my own firm, especially Jared, Matt Larry, and and and Joe Bowman, and Alex McDonald. These guys are great. And and and Jamie as well as he gets a little more wet behind, gets a little more experienced behind the ears, but you're doing great.
Um, on top of that, I want to thank all the TC family members, most importantly, my wife Michelle, my four kids. I can't tell you how much time I've missed away from these guys. Uh uh the time that we put in here. It's a family affair. But
listen, they gave me the support and patience to help build this. And I was looking back at my phone. I have literally more calls to Frank. Uh more calls to Frank over the last three years from let me and I actually wrote it down because you had that little log. I I
wrote down London, Paris, Amsterdam, San Francisco, Toronto, just about every state in the Constitution I've called Frank from. And it's crazy. And he always picks up the phone, too, which is even even better. So, and we we're accomplishing a lot. Uh, and I'd be
remiss if I didn't thank >> Frank's I'm not say better half, but Jerry Khan, Jerry, you've been fantastic. Thank you so much because it is you've jumped in and we appreciate everything you've done. Um, that's about it. Thank you to everybody
for coming out. Let's get this thing done. >> All right, let's roll. >> Without further ado, I make a motion to approve resolution 26-182. >> Second. Second. >> All right. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Cullen, >> yes.
>> Mr. Costro, >> yes. >> Mr. Seruto, >> yes. >> Mr. Stler, >> yes. >> Mayor Sakamandandy, >> yes. Thank you. >> All right. >> We signed an agreement and RPM has already signed. So, right here in front
of all of you, we're going to make history and uh we're going to sign it. >> Jerry anniversary gift. >> Yeah. All right, there you have it. All right. So, next resolution,
resolution 26-183, resolution of need for the proposed affordable housing project located or near intersection of Essex Street, Spring Street, and Milurn Avenue. Uh, are there any comments from the committee before we vote? Seeing none, I
make a motion to approve resolution 56-183. May I have a second? Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Common, >> yes. >> Mr. Costro, >> yes. >> Mr. Cerudo, >> yes. >> Mr. Stler, >> aurn. >> Mayor, secondy, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Resolution 26-184
authorizing the grant of a tax exemption and the execution of an agreement for payment in lie of taxes RPM Development LLC pursuant to NJSA 551 14K-1 ETSQ.
Are there any comments from the committee in regards to the resolution? >> Seeing none, I make a motion to approve resolution 26-184. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Common, >> yes. >> Mr. Posro, >> yes. >> Mr. Cerudo, >> yes. >> Mr. Stler, >> affirmative.
>> Mayor Secondandy, >> yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Ordinances. Ordinance 2763-26. Uh, I would like to present an ordinance entitled Ordinance number 2763-26. An ordinance to the township of Milbour, County of Essex, State of New Jersey,
adopting the Spring Street and Essex Street redevelopment plan for block 1212, lots 4, 22, 24, 25, 26, and 27, and block 1207, lot 7. I move this ordinance be taken up and passed on
first reading. The township be authorized to have the ordinance posted in accordance with law in the Milurn Township public notices page and for hearing and final passage on Tuesday September 1st 2026 at the Mild Education
Center located at 434 Milurn Avenue. >> Second in addition mayor as part of this introduction you will be referring this ordinance to planning board. So if you vote permanently, you're also permanently approving this morning. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh we had a motion and a second. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Collins, >> yes. >> Mr. Costro, >> yes. >> Mr. Cerudo, >> yes. >> Mr. Stler, >> Mayor Sakamandandy. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. Ordinance 2764-26.
Stler, you are scheduled to sponsor. >> I would like to present an ordinance in title. Ordinance number 2764-26 board bond ordinance providing for contribution to the alternate site redevelopment project to be undertaken in township of Milbour in the county of
best state of New Jersey appropriating 22,375,000 therefore in authorizing the issuance of 21,850,000 bonds or notes of the township to finance part of the cost thereof. I move that this ordinance be taken up
and passed on first reading and that the township clerk be authorized to have the ordinance posted in accordance with law on the Milbourne Township public notices page and for hearing and final passage on Tuesday, August 11, 2026 at the Milbourne Education Center located at 434 Milbour Avenue, Milbour.
>> Second. >> All right. Uh we have a motion and a second. Roll call vote, please. >> Mr. Collin, >> yes. >> Mr. Costro, >> yes. >> Mr. Cerudo, >> yes. >> Mr. Stler. >> Permanent. >> Mayor second. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. That brings us to second
public comment. Like to remind everyone, see if it's 10:15 p.m. will be entitled to make second public comment. It is optional. >> So with that said, this public comment period is allow for final comments from the community. When invited to speak,
offer your comments. Please come. It's the lecture. Here we indicate your name, whether you are a building resident and are property or business owner. Please do not provide your full address seeing as our meetings are recorded and readily available to the public. A reminder that in order to help facilitate an orderly
meetings and to permit all to be heard, speakers shall limit their comments to one minute session. Now open the public comment period. Alley, very resident. I just want to mention that folks uh these folks have done a great job, but you've done a hell
of a lot heck of a lot more than just the affordable housing. You've made this place safe, Milbury safe. You've done a lot more. You concerned about the health of the community. Uh Alex does a great
job. Make sure that the people that work for him are responsive and are doing their job on where they're supposed to be working. Mr. Stler, you do a great job thinking about New York as you say past, you
know, different places about the Newurn Playhouse. It's not just affordable housing that works that the town committee has been working on and this is what's really really important. So there's a lot that's been happening
besides affordable housing. People have to understand that people just don't it's more than this this running for office. As far as our new attorney compared to our own representation, oh my goodness. Uh, it's not I have nothing
against an oxygen carrying 80 year old attorney, but I'm 78 and I I've dealt with attorneys since I've been in my early 20s. I spent a lot of time in Washington with Bariel and all these other guys. And it's really a pleasure
to see someone who's really done a really fine job for the town. And it's really not easy. And by the way, I spent a lot of time in Essex County uh at the court and many many people said there's no chance that Milburn is going to come
out ahead. The attorneys there said no no way and I believe I've got a doctor's No, no address downtown resident. Um, mayor first in the laundry. No, the original 9 in I can be corrected and may
have changed but was not going to have laundry in each individual apartment. There's been issues in Livingston, you know, with the Lard project. They were going to have walk up did end up having to walk up on a couple of you can address even after not my um without having design standards
without going through the area need process without going through redevelopment process. I'm telling you my experience, you're in this town and elsewhere, you're going to get screwed. The costs are just going to go up and up and up. I understand you got a gun to the head. You have a poison pill, so to
speak, and guess might have had something to do with this. If we didn't do this, we're going to have to do the other way. I've seen the documents written up. This is being done in an expedited manner that we're not going to get the benefit a couple of others.
Wells Fargo project has two stories on Essex Street, has three floors on Milurn Avenue. There's a great change. I understand our planner is here. I don't think those things have been taken into consideration. It was blown badly back on that project. We're facing the train station railroad tracks on one side.
We need to do more. I'm not sure the four stories is the right height on both sides of the property. Not squaring off the property and acquiring the uh wild property is a mistake similar to what was done on the Wells Fargo property. wasn't squared off, you'd still have a portion of the property. It's not too
late to do these things. I understand there's a timeline. If we don't do these things right now, you're going to get hung up at the planning board. Same thing I said back in 21 and I sat with Alex and I sat with the mayor at the time. It's now 26. Not going to get done until at least 24 well after 24. This is
going to get hung up in the planning board. I don't know what ramifications we have here, right? Could be your process at the planning board. the appeal process by whoever held it process to be 2030 before this thing gets done. Take the
time to do it the right way. Somehow fair share housing they should be made understand we don't do it the right way they're going to get hung up and not get their units when they want their units. They love to put the notch I know McMad read my letters between myself and her going back to 2122.
They want a notch in their belt. They're going to have a partial notch. They're not going to have the notch that they had with the gun to your head, your predecessor's head, but it's still going to be a notch in their belt. They need to win the timeline. They're going to still lose on the timeline. I'll be there at the
planning board. Others won't be there. And um I think he said he didn't get the uh palm property. Anyway, um, who gets to pick who lives there?
That's my question. >> I remember we talked about this one time, Alex. I mean, is it going to be uh workforce, teachers, nurses?
>> I would try to work that, Joe, into the deal. >> We tried. We tried. I try. >> Let me retry that. >> Trust me. We try. >> Good job. >> It's done, right?
>> That's it. Um Jeff Fel five years we did it. David, remember when we were on this side going to this meeting giving pressure to Jared at various court hearings? And Jared, remember the first words you said at the
first meeting when you became misal attorney? what he asked me not to do, not to throw tomatoes at you. You got to point where we are today. But we but keep on focusing on different things. One thing that was not mentioned,
RPM was not a signatory to the original settlement agreement. prior administrations allowed them to come in after the conditional um hearing where the judge said, you
know, vote them out. We could have avoided this whole point. We didn't give him intervention intervenor status. And the question is why would that ever happen? It's never been answered because I know David, when you were on this side, you were always asking that question. Who authorized
that decision? who authorized that consent order to be also very important to monitor the applications being filed with the N New Jersey Housing Mortgage Finance Authority with RPM is going to
have to disclose the various what they estimate the cost is and the various sources of their funding of the project and you can monitor that when the discussions we've had and and I'm going to give you a heads up there's going to be an issue about the validity of this tax exemption that you granted. There's
issues as to compliance with blanted areas clause of the state constitution which puts a limit on the profits and revenues that RPM can take out of the project if RPM is not investing in the project. What kind of rate of return do
you give it? What is it based on? I don't know the answer to this and these are the things we're going to find out because in the past in the redevelopers agreement that we had in for the first project one of the exhibits we had was where they had to set forth their projected cost and a timeline of what
they're going to do. I'm just saying we might have we don't run around today that we're celebrating. We got this part is the first battle. We're still in a war. We have to monitor and we have to protect the school district with the revenues. >> Anyone online?
>> No. >> All right. I know closed public comment. Um motion to ades that it's the people be chosen bilaterally just like every other buildings and one of the problems with
this whole process is that township residents even those who would qualify under the affordable side have no priority. >> That's unfortunate but that's the And Mr. Feld, I assume you would know this. The reason RPM got intervenor status is
because prior to not on this day is >> I said that >> decided from the conditional developer. They were designated. So then they got >> there's two different issues. >> Yeah. So, so I as so it was in the slideshow that in 23
the contract committee did make an effort to get the nine main street as well get the nine street project approved and that you know the legislation passed as a slideshow. Um, as part of that effort to get it to get everything through, part of the deal was
we they all agreed to make them that uh an interested party in that's my answer. My answer is in 23 RPM and the matri project was fully moving forward until uh November and then 2024 when when the township committee decided
to take a different direction. >> All right. Motion to adear motion.