Saturday, November 23, 2013

City Land Sought For Development

Four of the five items on the agenda for a special meeting Tuesday are re-runs from the Nov. 12 meeting. The last one is new. For some background on the proposed ordinance "authorizing conveyance of Block 247, Lots 7 and 9, to the Housing Authority, subject to conditions," see Plaintalker's post here.

Because the meeting is on Tuesday, the ordinance may not be available for review by bloggers and other nosy types until Monday. Some of the questions in mind are whether the city will receive compensation for the land and the relationships of the various entities involved in the proposed development. 

For example, the development arm of the Housing Authority of Plainfield is the Plainfield Community Development Corporation.

Another part of the project team is West Second Street Associates LLC.  Which of these entities will deal with the land use boards, if the governing body turns over the city-owned property?

Those who want to follow the action will have to educate themselves on these nuances. For a comprehensive report on CDCs and factors for optimum functioning, click here

--Bernice

10 comments:

  1. Counting myself among the nosy types, there are more than enough interlocking personal relationships in this project to warrant closer scrutiny. Between the City Council, Administration, Housing Authority, PCDC, and various investors, the potential for self-dealing and conflicts of interest abound. Little over a week ago there was a possible violation of the 'representation' clause of the city's ethics ordinance (MC 11:17-8), as there may have been also at the October Planning Board meeting. Whatever the merits of the project may be, I expect the need for full disclosure of all financial interests, including any quiet money. Moreover, based on the City Charter, Section 7.4 (b) (iii), this transaction should require Superior Court review and approval before the City Council proceeds any further.

    This is an interesting Special Meeting, in that four of the five items were rejected fewer than two weeks ago. I find it not quite unusual, but certainly politically foolish, that none of the Council members who maintain blogs have utilized those vehicles to provide needed detail and rationale for why some of these ordinances should be passed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. To respond to Alan's comment regarding blogging about the items on the agenda--I am awaiting a response from the Acting City Administrator. As you know, the mayor was sitting at the meeting, but declined/refused to comment on the questions about the transfers, or on anything, for that matter, I have asked for a rationale and justification for each item on the transfer resolution--I am still awaiting it. When I can comment on it more expansively, I will certain take to my blog.

    Regarding Block 247, Lots 7 and 9, I have my own concerns about the Plainfield CDC and the PHA, as well as the desire to make so many apartments at such small sizes. I would have to have full disclosure of ALL the entities, partners, and principals to such a deal before I would consider voting for such a thing. As Alan has noted, we need transparency on this and all projects.

    Rebecca


    Regarding the CFO, the reasoning is that in order to attract qualified talent, one of the methods would be to increase the salary range. It's simply extending the range--which would still be subject to negotiation on the part of the prospective hire and the administration.

    Regarding the "Chief of Staff" position--this position is explained in the ordinance--to serve as a press officer and to deal with communications, and also to liaise with all the departments and the CA as well as with other agencies. I see this position as working with the Mayor and CA and the public to help move us forward.
    I think it is worth it for us to give this position a chance. While at the League of Municipalities Conference in AC this week, I could have almost cried at how far behind Plainfield continues to lag (in comparison with other cities of like size, demographic, and median income) in terms of IT, infrastructure, grants, and all the other things that would make us a professionally-run 21st century city of opportunity.

    Rebecca

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do other cities of our "size, demographic, and median income" have a chief of staff? If so, who?

      Delete
    2. Thank you Rebecca for responding. The need for more transparency on the real estate deal is self-evident. As for the other items, I'm not swayed. Please do provide comparable ranges and salaries for the CFO position. $155,000 seems excessive and maybe the upper range should be trimmed back to about $135,000. Show us the numbers. As for the Chief of Staff, if this is really a press officer, $95,000 looks really high by maybe $35,000 to $55,000. But we know it's not just a press officer. The ordinance suggest implementing policies and directing relations, not your typical press officer duties, and in any case impinging on the functions of the City Administrator and department heads. The position actually seems extraneous assuming the other appointees are up to the task. As you say, the city lags in IT and infrastructure. Wouldn't it be wiser to spend money in these areas rather than fluffing up our hairstyle so to speak?

      Delete
  3. The only google reference to West Second Street Associates LLC is a Flint Michigan realestate investment company. "West Second Street Associates was founded in 1993 as a Michigan based Limited Liability Company that specializes in real estate development and long term management of high quality GSA Buildings (General Services Administration) throughout the United States."


    What has that have to do with the Plainfield Housing Authority? .

    ReplyDelete
  4. I can hardly wait to see which councilperson will be changing their vote to support the funding of the unnecessary police promotions. There is sure to be a trade-off, the Green Team will vote for the Chief of Staff position as long as one of Mapp's people flip their vote for the police promotions. Watch and see!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Doc - It has nothing to do with Plainfield because it is located in Michigan. All you have to do is read the description "specializes in real estate development and long term management of high quality GSA buildings" to know it isn't here.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was a rhetorical question; I posted that it was a Michigan concern. But, since thee property itouches West 2nd st; it could have been possible that someone locally could have set up a company with a similar name; has happened before.

      Perhaps the real question should be; what does a commercial company have to do with the local Housing Authority???

      Delete
  6. Today, I received my Mapp Administration survival pack, it contained:

    - an Obama hope and change bumper sticker
    - instructions for over-inflating tires
    - a Bush's fault yard sign
    - a Tax The Rich banner
    - an application for unemployment
    - an application for food stamps
    - a letter of assignation of debt to my grandchildren.

    Everything was made in China. Keep an eye out. Your
    survival pack should be arriving shortly.

    ReplyDelete