
CRR Alleges 2016 Master Plan Amendment to Allow Valley’s Expansion Was An Improper Settlement of Valley’s Lawsuit Against the Planning Board; Cites Conflict of Interest of Board Attorney; and Finds Fault with Prior Planning Board Processes.
May 16,2016
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ. Concerned Residents of Ridgewood, Inc. (CRR), a New Jersey not-for-profit corporation, filed a Complaint on May 12 th, in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the Planning Board of the Village of Ridgewood and Valley Hospital Inc., demanding that both the 2016 and 2010 Master Plan Amendments tailored to Valley Hospital’s immediate and long-term growth plans be declared null and void. CRR is represented by Michael B. Kates of the law firm of Kates Nussman Rapone Ellis & Farhi, LLP, of Hackensack.
On April 5, 2016, the Planning Board reversed itself and voted to settle the lawsuit that Valley Hospital had filed against the Board in 2014 for rejecting a proposed Master Plan Amendment that would have allowed Valley to more than double in size at the Ridgewood site. The “settlement”reduced Valley’s proposed development from 1,240,000 square feet to 1,206,000, whichrepresents an insignificant 3% reduction in the size of the proposed expansion that was denied in 2014.
CRR’s Complaint questions the motivation behind such a capitulation on principle and sets forth several flaws and improprieties in both the process and reasoning the Board used in arriving at that settlement. Pete McKenna, CRR President, commented, “It is astounding that our Planning Board would capitulate to Valley Hospital for this almost immaterial reduction in the immensity of Valley’s proposed expansion. Neither this settlement, nor the manner in which it took place andwas enshrined as a Master Plan Amendment, are in accordance with the Municipal Land Use Law.”
In another Count of its Complaint, CRR asserts that the process culminating in the settlement was compromised by a conflict of interest, stemming from the fact that the Planning Board’s attorney, Gail Price, did not recuse herself and her firm from advising on the settlement at the same time that her husband, Richard Brooks, was a candidate for Village Council and was expounding in public on his positions on the Valley litigation. This conflict was brought to the Board’s attention by a resident attorney (not CRR), in a letter and during hearings on the settlement, calling for the appointment of outside counsel to replace Ms. Price’s firm, Price, Meese, Shulman and D’Arminio PC. But the Board disregarded the conflict, failed to investigate it, and made no public announcement as to its position following closed session discussions. CRR asserts that the failure to disclose what transpired in closed session, in and of itself, is a violation that should render the settlement null and void. CRR president McKenna contends there may be more to the issue, saying “the conflict issue raises other serious questions about how this settlement process was handled by the Board, and we intend to get some answers in this lawsuit.”
In a further Count of the Complaint, CRR asserts that the Board, at the direction of attorney Price, committed major procedural errors during the Board’s consideration of Valley Hospital’s proposed Master Plan Amendments, dating back to 2006. The Complaint focuses particular attention on how Ms. Price applied Ridgewood’s Ordinance 3066 in a way that severely restricted the participation of CRR and the residents, created prohibitively narrow standards for evidence to be put forth by the community, gave disproportionate control of the proceedings to Valley, and ultimately, in CRR’s words, “turned the master plan process upside down”. As set forth in the Complaint, the Planning Board attorney wrongly precluded any modification of the Amendment proposed by Valley, stating that such a narrow approach was “in contravention of the Municipal Land Use Law’s vesting of absolute discretion in the Planning Board to craft a Master Plan according to the Board’s understanding of the public interest and not according to the narrower interest of any property owner.” In sum, Ms. Price’s handling of the Master Plan Amendment hearings pervasively skewed the process in Valley’s favor.
Regarding the conflict of interest issue, CRR believes Mr. Brooks’ pursuit of public office to be laudable, and in fact recognizes his considerable contributions to our Village. The fault here, CRR contends, lies with the candidate’s spouse who is a government official and who does not recuse herself or her law firm from concurrent mediation and settlement discussions that concern the largest single development project in Village history. CRR also stated that it resolved to take this action during the first week of May, but did not want it to appear to unfairly influence Mr. Brooks’ candidacy or the municipal election; therefore, the organization purposefully delayed filing its Complaint until the election had ended.
“Concerned Residents of Ridgewood does not take legal action lightly, and realizes such action incurs an unfortunate expense to Village taxpayers and even more to those residents who will donate to CRR to fund our legal effort; however, due to the continued mismanagement of the Master Plan process and the potentially dire and irreversible consequences of the Master Plan Amendment of 2016, we feel bound to take this action to protect the character of the Village and the wellbeing of the community, and most importantly, the welfare of children attending BF Middle School who would have to endure more than six years of construction during phase one of the expansion,” Mr. McKenna further stated.
Constant Contact newsletter page, where you may help support us through Pay Pal or a check. If you’d like to be on our email list for updates, wish further information, or have any questions, please contact helpdesk@stopvalley.com.
Gee whiz. Wasn’t there a claim of some sort made by Mr. Brooks and Ms. Price that there would have been no conflict of interest even if Mr. Brooks had won his bid for Council?
So her refusal to enter the results of an on line petition now come back to haunt Ms. Price.
I love it…end the Entitlement.
This will keep the lawyers in clover.
Guess CRR tossed the last attorney, found a new guy to waste more money.
Let Valley do what they want, but tax the shit out of them.
And until the YMCA / YWCA / Bolger Fitness Center starts providing discounted memberships to Ridgewood residents (like other Y’s in the area do for their local patrons), tax them too.
Someone needs to explain how the amended plan which CRR favors would reduce the time/impact of construction on BF. I just dont buy that if they build 400k square feet instead of 800k square feet that the difference in construction time/impact is going to be appreciable.
8:39am, CRR has had the same attorney for the past several years. The first one they used was too expensive.
9:33am, tax the sh*t out of them AND tell them they can’t over develop in our village!
10:04am, what amended plan that CRR favors? Valley Hospital AND the Ridgewood Planning Board refused to allow into the record an example of a compromise drawn up by a hired planner on behalf of CRR. Valley has never, I repeat NEVER been willing to sit down to discuss a compromise with the residents. Their plan is their plan…period. Well you know what? If you’re gonna be a greedy bully, you’ll wind up with nothing!
they just keep spending our money making us pay to defend these suits. rhs graduation can’t come soon enough.
10:18–I get that Valley wont discuss and it is disgusting. I am just not sure how the construction keeps being an issue since CRR is willing to allow construction if it involves less square footage. It seems to me construction is construction. The questions of whether Valley will become too regional and/or that the construction will be so large as to overwhelm the neighborhood remain. But even a compromise plan will lead to massive construction.
“Ridgewood Taxpayer” – For being one that’s a strange statement. First, Mr.Kates, who is one of the more prominent land use attorneys in N.J., has been involved with the CRR for quite awhile. Second, if this ridiculous proposal by Valley does go through whatever equity you have on whatever property you are paying taxes on in Ridgewood will be heading south. You might want to look at it another way, as in whatever donation you give to their cause may be the best donation you ever gave to anything in Ridgewood. Let’s face it, they are helping to preserve what you’re paying taxes on.
Why would I make a contribution for legal fees for CRR, in order to incur additional legal fees as a taxpayer?
I’ve heard enough hysteria about the dust, the noise, the trucks, the plummeting property values, blah blah blah.
I hope Valley Hospital gets the approval and is allowed to modernize.
Was the hospital there when you bought your house?
Please don’t tell me they shouldn’t be allowed to modernize.
Everything has been modernized and is a lot different than it was 30 years ago.
Valley Hospital does not want to modernize. They want to double the size of their already non-conforming 24 hr business. They have consistently been told that they have exceeded development on their site, but they keep asking, and now suing for more. When does it stop? How about a helipad? Or maybe you’d like the homes on N. Van Dien being turned into Dr’s offices? CRR has never made construction a major factor in their efforts against this expansion, although many of their supporters are very concerned about the construction related issues Yes, the construction will be disruptive and potentially threatening to all children and adults that use BF, but CRR is most concerned with what is left after the construction. A One million sq ft facility with a 240,000 sq ft garage in the middle of a residential neighborhood. It is a municipal land use issue – the right for any municipality to zone as they see fit for their residents. That’s why you should make a donation to CRR.
“Modernize”. That’s funny.
-thed
Councilwoman Hauck claimed on Facebook that all of the Village Council unanimously wanted her to serve on the mediation team. She wrote that “all five” of them wanted her to serve. This proved to be inaccurate. She asked to be on the mediation team so she could “learn about the litigation.” Susan Knudsen did not want her to be, Mike Sedon was interested but had childcare issues, Albert was recused from the discussion, and Aronsohn wanted Gwenn to serve. According to public comments by Councilman Sedon, the four of them “conceded” to allow Mrs. Hauck to serve. Valley got exactly what they wanted. A friend and generous donor served on the mediation team that was in place to help the residents of Ridgewood. And who won? Surprise, surprise, The Valley rode herd on us.
And oh, by the way, Councilwoman Hauck violated the confidentiality of the Closed Session meeting on December 2nd by announcing on social media how the discussion went. Not only did she violate the closed session meeting confidentiality, but what she said was also grossly inaccurate.
RT- Another supporter who hears what they want to hear. Answer to your first question : Because they are helping to preserve equity in every house in Ridgewood.. No”hysteria,” just major concerns over a 7 -10 year construction project in the middle of a residential neighborhood. How the hell is that hard to understand ? To modernize is not a problem, to double in size is.Yes, it was there, before I bought my house on So. Pleasant, near Somerville. And that was before Valley got arrogant and greedy, two things those folks nearer the hospital had positively no control over. So that’s why you make a contribution.
Ridgewood Taxpayer
You seem to eaquate the words “modernize” and “double”.
They can modernize, even expand a bit. They also have a LOT of land that they can build on.
They do not need to double in size as a onconforming building in a residentially zoned neighborhood.
Valley came after many of the houses and after the school was built. The issue is that Valley should not be able to increase its size beyond what the 15 acre property can sustain and to run roughshod over the neighborhood. Valley has purchased numerous properties and businesses in the area. They can do anything they want just not all of it on the Linwood Van Dien site. I hope that many of us will contribute to CRR. They are doing this for Ridgewood.
These debates are interesting. Having a modern, updated, hospital that can expand to increase business should be a positive. Perhaps we should consider knocking Valley down and build the apartments required to meet the state ordered housing criteria.
Having a sports field should be a positive. Perhaps we should build another strip mall at Schendler and collect the tax money. Who wouldn’t rather have a 7-11 then watch kids playing a sport?
Perhaps we should allow the closed car dealers to remain that way for a few more decades? They do add a bit of nostalgia to the village when you drive past.
And perhaps the concerns about construction are correct. Going to make it very hard to expand or modernize a school in the future if we can’t do construction.
5:46, why are you so interested in Valley increasing it’s business? To bring more traffic, more people smoking on our sidewalks, more employees parking on our streets, more of our police and fire department time spent filing reports of theft and unruly behavior? Maybe you are looking forward to talking to the residents of Steilen Ave who have been dealing with noise and light violations from Valley for years or maybe you are just looking forward to driving into Ridgewood and seeing a 1700 car garage at the intersection of Linwood and Van Dien. Won’t that look beautiful! Maybe they can make the lights that will shine from it 24 hrs a day in a residential neighborhood color coordinated for the holidays. Maybe we should turn the houses on either side of you into high density housing in order to fulfill our fair housing. It will only take 8 months of construction for that, not 6 years. What’s the matter? Just because you bought a house in a residential zone that doesn’t allow hdh doesn’t mean things can’t change, right? In just the same way that Valley’s lot cannot be turned into apartments, Schedler cannot be a 7-11, so just stop with that stupid argument. And yes, the car dealerships should be developed, but changing the density in our cbd from 12 units per acre to 36 was unnecessarily excessive. 24 units per acre would have brought the same benefit without as much downside. Unless of course all you’re concerned about is maximizing the profits of developers. Here’s a word for you to ponder…moderation. Is that so hard to achieve? Bigger is not always better.
5:46am – you sound like one of the handful people in this town who are on the mission to mislead residents. Put everything in it’s “context” and then talk. You are arguing against apartments at Schendler and @ Valley location but at the same time proposing them at the car dealerships. Hypocrite.
5:46-“Having a modern, updated, hospital that can expand to increase business should be a positive,” yes, if it wasn’t in the middle of a residential neighborhood. The people in Princeton figured that out, funny how the people in Ridgewood can’t (although as this recent election showed enough is enough).
Thank you, Bill H. No matter the arguments on behalf of Valley Hospital doubling its size in a residential neighborhood, (single rooms! Modern equipment! Blah blah blah), the limit was reached long ago regarding what can physically be done with the same old 15 acres.