All posts by rahwayrising@gmail.com

Looking for feedback on the blog

I’m looking for some feedback this week about the blog, namely when exactly you read and visit the site. Whether or not the poll results affect what time I can post remains to be seen but I’d appreciate hearing if you have any preferences.

When do you usually read/check the blog?
– Early morning
– Late morning
– Early afternoon
– Late afternoon
– Evening
– Late night
– Weekends

I can tell site visits are certainly higher during the week, one reason why I don’t usually post on the weekend. I tend to post whenever I have time and some information though I’ve tried different schedules, if possible, such as just after midnight so email subscribers get the posts about 10 hours later; lately I’ve aimed for a specific time, like 7 p.m. Would that be something you’re interested in, a set time, like 10 a.m. or noon or 7 p.m., to be consistent? Or perhaps you like the randomness and surprise of whether there’s a post that day?

Also, I’ll sometimes share interesting items about redevelopment or planning stories from outside of Rahway, either via Twitter and/or Facebook, and/or tacked on to the end of a blog post. I like to keep up about goings-on elsewhere but also perhaps some items might be relevant to local redevelopment. Let me know what you think about that.

I’m always open to suggestions and feedback, so feel free to comment or shoot me a comment. Thanks for reading.

Restriction lifted on proposed jazz club

The Redevelopment Agency last night officially agreed to consider uses other than those permitted in the redevelopment agreement for the former Kelly’s Pub property.

A principal of the proposed KC Jazz Club at 1646-54 Irving St. (Block 162, Lots 5-7) made his case to commissioners at their meeting last month, arguing that financing evaporated while annual costs continue unabated. A restriction limiting the property to use as a jazz club apparently also hindered any potential sale or new developer to resurrect the project.

(Note the new sign in recent weeks, “Commercial Building Available,” on the left in the photo above, juxtaposed with the one on the right that says: “Coming Soon! KC Jazz Restaurant.”)

The resolution was adopted during a special meeting last night, a week after a lack of quorum for last week’s regularly-scheduled meeting did not allow for official action to be taken.

***

Check out this piece from Crain’s New York Business about Brooklyn’s Myrtle Avenue. Twenty years ago, you’d be told to avoid the Clinton Hill neighborhood’s “crime-ridden main drag.” Today, 97 percent of the businesses are locally owned, with eight new arrivals in the past year, and 78 percent of them are minorities and/or women.

The story provides some details about community leaders and longtime residents creating a revitalization project in 1999 that has morphed into a business improvement district with an annual budget of $1 million thanks to money from the city, private foundations and fees on local landlords.

Council overrides mayor’s anti-nepotism veto

In another instance where the City Council and Mayor Rick Proctor parted ways, the governing body on Monday night voted unanimously (9-0) to override his veto of an ordinance that would have established an “anti-nepotism policy” within the city’s personnel policies.

“Never in a million years did I expect an official in Rahway would veto” an anti-nepotism ordinance, 6th Ward Councilman Samson Steinman said at Monday night’s meeting. He cited an anti-nepotism bill at the state level, introduced by Amy Handlin (R-Monmouth), and reiterated a statement from the assemblywoman about the need for such legislation.

Proctor and the City Council sparred earlier this year over allegations that he tried to get his wife hired as the new health officer, a position he held for several years before becoming mayor. The council originally adopted the ordinance Nov. 14 and the mayor vetoed the measure (O-33-11) on Nov. 23. In his remarks at the Nov. 14 meeting, Proctor said he found it odd that the co-sponsor of the city’s anti-nepotism ordinance was the “same council member who called me in June begging for a job for his child this summer,” referring to 1st Ward Councilman Robert Rachlin, who seconded the measure with Steinman as the primary sponsor.

Former Mayor James Kennedy had an interesting comment about the veto in today’s Star-Ledger story: “What the heck is he thinking?” Proctor was Democratic municipal chairman for many years during Kennedy’s tenure as mayor. “Just when you thought you’d heard it all. The veto was the craziest thing I’ve ever seen in politics,” Kennedy told the Ledger.

In a memo to the city clerk Nov. 23, Proctor outlined several reasons for his veto, including exposure to lawsuits based on racial and religious discrimination and jeopardizing the city’s status as an equal opportunity employer. He also believed it conflicts with the open competitive process set forth by the state Civil Service Commission and is discriminatory “on face value by eliminating potentially qualified job candidates solely on the basis of relationship.”

Hiring of personnel originates with directors and the business administrator, not the mayor and council, so Proctor argued that influence would be exerted at that level. “If the ordinance is going to be more than just window dressing…the scope should be expanded to include department directors and administrator at a minimum. Even a cursory review of nepotistic relationships among city employees will support this argument,” he wrote.

Council reduces mayor’s pay by unanimous vote

The City Council last night night unanimously (9-0) approved a salary ordinance (0-38-11) that will slash the mayor’s pay by 68 percent, effective Jan. 1, 2012. Entering the second year of a four-year term, Mayor Rick Proctor will see the salary for his part-time post reduced from $65,000 to $20,809.

As he has maintained for weeks, the mayor said the move by City Council is “political payback” for seeking accountability. “I refused to go along with business as usual approach to management. And now I am paying the price,” he wrote in a three-page memo to Council President David Brown dated yesterday. Accompanying the memo was a bar graph indicating the percentage increase in salary ranges for management personnel under the proposed ordinance, most of which were 0 to 4 percent — except for the mayor’s position.

“Passage of this ordinance is fiscally irresponsible and totally unnecessary given that a valid ordinance is in effect. If passed, your actions will make it clear that the only purpose is to attack the mayor’s salary,” Proctor wrote. He claimed the governing body is purposely deviating from past practice that has been in effect for 20 years, where the council adopts the municipal budget, and then, based on available funding, passes a salary ordinance for management personnel.

“No one in this city is foolish enough to believe that you take this action pursuant to a reasoned, thoughtful consideration of its consequences,” Proctor wrote. “This council acts now based on politics, in an arbitrary and capricious manner. You have allowed this legislative body to be coerced by a small but threatening minority whose political rewards have been threatened by me as mayor.” (All nine council members and the mayor are Democrats.)

The few residents who were in attendance Monday night spoke at the public meeting. Scott Caffee of West Scott Avenue, a frequent attendee at City Council meetings in recent months, agreed that the mayor’s pay cut was a “personal, calculated” move by the governing body and suggested reducing everyone’s salary. Frequent council critic Patrick Cassio, the local Republican chairman and a candidate against Proctor last year, questioned why the council did not act in January when Proctor took office and what happened between now and the last election season cycle when other council members campaigned for the mayor.

Sixth Ward Councilman Samson Steinman, who worked on Proctor’s mayoral campaign last fall, conceded the pay cut should have been done a year ago, making the point that department heads who replaced longtime directors in recent years also were brought in at lower salaries. He continued to reject claims that the pay cut was a personal slight against the mayor.

Floren Robinson of Essex Street feared that cutting the salary will discourage qualified people who might want to run and not incentivize people to work to better the city or deal with all that it takes to be mayor. “Fighting over a few thousand dollars is not going to help the city,” she said. Her husband, Michael Pressman, a compensation consultant by trade, told the council that compensation can “serve as a powerful performance motivator” and in any situation where a person is replacing an incumbent, they’re aware of the terms prior to their new role. He said the city needs a cooperative government and an engaged mayor, emphasizing his concerns that the ordinance will have a negative impact.

Steinman countered that the mayor’s position is not a job as much as it is public service. “To look at the mayor’s job as a job is totally wrong,” he said. Fifth Ward Councilwoman Jennifer Wenson-Maier suggested that some highly qualified mayors in other Union County towns make $1 in their positions, such as Fanwood’s Colleen Mahr. Council members earn $8,043 and also are considered part-time posts.

Other council members didn’t speak on the salary ordinance directly, alluding to it and other critiques in their public comments. Councilman At Large James Baker called some of the criticisms of the council “out of line, not based on any sound perspective.” He said the accomplishments by this council and mayor are often “overlooked or oversimplified. We make difficult decisions in a proactive and positive way and the public is not necessarily aware of these things.”

Brown, the council president and representative to the Fourth Ward, suggested that when the current council majority took control of the governing body in 1996, “downtown was a ghost town.” Some of those same council members, he added, have been responsible for bringing millions of dollars into the city.

Meridia Grand sold for $19 million

Barely two years after properties were razed to make way for the the 88-unit Meridia Grand, the five-story rental complex has sold for $19 million. The sale (Block 379, Lot 2.01) closed Oct. 25 and the buyer was listed as a West Hempstead, N.Y.-based entity called 3101-15 Ave. I, LLC.

2010 rendering

The seller, Capodagli Property Company, last week gained approval for a 108-unit rental project, Meridia Water’s Edge, to be built adjacent to the city library. City Council will vote tonight on awarding a PILOT (Payment In Lieu Of Taxes) to the project. The Pompton Plains-based developer also is negotiating to take over the foreclosed Savoy project at Main and Monroe streets.

2008 rendering

The Meridia Grand, which was named Renaissance at Rahway throughout the planning process, is assessed for $5.362 million and paid about $31,000 in property taxes last year. Apartments started leasing last summer.

Renaissance at Rahway originally had been planned as a 72-unit condo development but that was changed in 2008 to 64 rental units, before bumping the total to its present 88. The plan originally also called for developing the entire triangle block but one property owner declined to sell. The project also eliminated a stretch of Montgomery Street from East Grand Avenue to Monroe Street.

Poll results: Reduce mayor and Council salaries

More than a third of voters in our latest poll agreed that City Council should reduce the mayor’s salary, with another quarter adding that salaries for City Council members should be cut as well.

The City Council is scheduled to vote on a salary ordinance tomorrow night that would reduce the mayor’s salary by 68 percent, to $20,809.

Should the City Council reduce the mayor’s salary?* Yes. 34 percent (44/128 votes)
* Yes, but they should all be cut, including Council members. 23 percent (30/128)
* Not only cut, but salaries for all elected officials, and then some, should be cut. 17 percent (23/128)
* No. 12 percent, (16/128)
* No; you get what you pay for; they should be paid something to attract worthy candidates. 7 percent (10/128)
* Times are tough, make cuts wherever you can. 3 percent (5/128)

There were a total 128 votes cast in the latest poll and there was as smattering of votes both for and against that I received via email, which I’m not sure if they actually went to the site and clicked on the poll.

I always like to offer more than a yes/no question in the poll, and I realized too late (after I’d posted it and some votes had already come in) that I should’ve had another option, something like, “No, it reeks of political retribution,” since that’s what the mayor is claiming. Perhaps that would’ve gotten some more votes for the no group, or least another option, compared to the three “Yes” options. Either way, about three quarters of the votes favored a reduction in some way, and 40 percent wanted to cut all salaries, not just the mayor’s. In all, 20 percent of votes said don’t cut the mayor’s salary.

Remember this is a simple poll that, if you have enough time to waste, can be manipulated. It’s not exactly scientific.

City Council set to vote on mayor’s salary cut

The City Council is set to vote on a salary ordinance Monday night that would reduce the mayor’s salary by 68 percent. The council also is expected to override Mayor Rick Proctor’s veto of an anti-nepotism ordinance (O-33-11) as well as vote on a PILOT for the Meridia Water’s Edge development (O-29-11).

Continue reading City Council set to vote on mayor’s salary cut

Crime rate dips for fourth straight year

Overall crime in Rahway dipped some 15 percent last year, led by drops in larceny, burglary and motor vehicle thefts. It’s the fourth year in a row crime has dropped, according to the state Uniform Crime Report (UCR).

Continue reading Crime rate dips for fourth straight year