Municipal Complex
At the February 27, 2023 meeting, Township Committee returned from a closed session and voted to buy the entire 20-acre flag lot at 144 Carranza Road for its new municipal complex. The purchase price is $825,900. If we add in the costs of appraisal, environmental studies, engineering fees and other soft costs including settlement costs, the total cost for the property will likely exceed one million dollars. The township will settle on the property by the end of 2023.
The decision to buy this property wasn’t surprising. Other locations didn’t get serious consideration. It appeared that the committee always wanted 144 Carranza Road, notwithstanding its small frontage, limited visibility from the road and the proximity of existing residential neighbors to a proposed pubic works facility.
Committee Changes Course
But the committee’s recent decision to buy the entire 20-acre property was a change. Tabernacle’s initial agreement, made September 28, 2022, was to purchase only 19 acres of the property for $500,000.
Plan A: A Narrow Flag Lot
The plan for the 19-acre purchase first showed up in the committee’s appraisal. It showed a 1-acre residential lot being subdivided from the 20- acre property for the seller to keep.
The idea of letting the sellers keep the most visible part of the property was a clear problem. Most town halls are located in visible, centralized locations, just as Tabernacle’s old town hall is. Allowing the sellers to keep the house would further reduce the frontage and visibility of the new municipal complex. In addition, the subdivision would create a lot that has less frontage than is required by Tabernacle’s zoning code.
Questions the Committee Didn’t Ask
Despite these problems of visibility, frontage and zoning, the committee went forward with carving out the subdivision without any public discussion. Almost all of the committee’s work was done in executive session, as it still is. Indeed, the township’s own timeline of events for the municipal complex shows that 75% of its actions were done in executive session, behind the scenes and out of the public eye.
According to the executive session minutes, which the commmittee approved, there was no discussion of the house, a subdivision, frontage, visibility or zoning requirements.
I’d like to think otherwise, but the idea that the committee didn’t discuss those issues can only be explained in two ways. Both explanations are unacceptable. Either they are so incompetent that they didn’t understand the importance of the house, a subdivision, frontage, visibility or zoning requirements. Or they’re laundering their minutes. Perhaps both explanations are true.
The committee has never posted the appraisal in the special “Town Hall” section of the township home page where information on the new municipal complex is posted. But it became a public document that residents could request through OPRA. At that point, taxpayers could see that the committee planned to carve out a one-acre lot so the seller could keep the existing house.
Public Questions the Committee Didn’t Answer
The committee received a lot of questions and comments about the subdivision and the flag lot over the course of numerous meetings. Its policy is to not respond to public comments; and they didn’t. Its Public Information Officer, William Burns, didn’t respond either.
Questions were also asked at the township’s “Public Information Meeting” on December 19, 2022. Mayor Moore assured the public that the committee would answer all questions (but only if they were first submitted in writing). But the committee didn’t answer all questions about the subdivision and the flag lot, which still remain unanswered.
Even as questions were being asked about the subdivision and the flag lot, the committee was so locked into allowing the seller to keep the house that it submitted a subdivision application to the Burlington County Planning Board. It was conditionally approved on January 10, 2023. The township paid the engineering and application costs and, probably, the legal costs as well.
The committee also submitted a subdivision application to the Pinelands Commission. The township paid for these costs.
The Tabernacle Land Development Board also received subdivision application. It was listed on the December 7, 2022 meeting agenda. It was withdrawn at the January 5, 2023 meeting. Perhaps, the township paid for these costs also.
Plan B: A Wider Flag Lot
After submitting three development applications for the subdivision, it was very surprising that, at the February 27, 2023 meeting, the committee announced that it’s buying the entire 20-acre property.
Even with the purchase of all 20 acres, Tabernacle is still buying a flag lot. The developable part of the property, roughly 19 acres, has no frontage. It’s located behind other lots on Carranza Road. The developable acreage is the “flag.” It is connected to Carranza Road by a relatively narrow piece of land. This is the “flag pole.” The only difference with the purchase of the whole lot is that the “flag pole” will be wider.
The problem with a flag lot for a municipal building is that it lacks full frontage and good visibility to Carranza Road. This is particularly true here where so much of the property is located behind houses and lacks direct access.
It remains to be seen whether the usable frontage is sufficient for a municipal building and whether the new building will be setback too far.
It seems likely that any municipal complex may be located somewhere in the back 19-acre portion because that’s where most of the land is. The driveway into the municipal complex will still likely be through the “flag pole” from Carranza Road to the back section.
What is the Committee Thinking Now?
Presumably, the house will be demolished. But, predictably, the committee hasn’t explained what they are thinking.
It’s hard to know what Tabernacle’s new municipal complex will look like because the committee hasn’t released any plans or sketches. That continues to be the problem. When you have a committee that’s so impervious to questions and comments and so resistant to discussing its business in public, you don’t know what they’re thinking until it’s a done deal.
I don’t want to know their private thoughts. But a major public investment like this warrants lots of public discussion. The total development cost of the full project could be $7 million to $10 million. The committee is buying 144 Carranza Road for about $1 million in total costs. The municipal complex will be about $5 million to $7 million. Plus the committee has a concept plan to redevelop the old municipal building site. The committee hasn’t released a cost estimate yet. But one million dollars doesn’t seem unreasonable especially because old town hall is part of the project somehow.
Because these costs are so high, the committee should explain why it abandoned the subdivision plan after pursuing it for months.
Sequoia School: The One Million Dollar Alternative to the Ten Million Dollar Municipal Complex
Residents Deserve An Explanation
It’s too late to purchase the Sequoia School and site for a municipal building. But it’s not too late for Kim Brown and Sammy Moore to explain why they think Tabernacle is better served by a new $7 million to $10 million municipal complex rather than the extremely visible, more centrally located and far, far cheaper Sequoia School site. After all, they will be asking tax payers to bond for the new municipal complex, which will cost roughly 10 times more than the Sequoia School and its 5.8 acre site. They had a chance to buy Sequoia in 2018, but, along with Joseph Barton, voted against it. Why?
No recognition award, like the one that the committee gave to Friends of Cyrus (the eventual purchasers of the Sequoia School site) at the February 27, 2023 township meeting, can substitute for their explanation.
Live Meetings!!!
The committee’s virtual meetings have been technological disasters. At every meeting there are people who can’t fully participate because they don’t have audio, don’t have video; can’t hear or can’t be heard. This includes everyone: committee members, professionals and residents.
Every meeting is regularly interrupted with comments like “You’re muted,” “No audio,” “Can you hear me now?,” “This [bad communication] happens to me all the time,” “she’s dropped off” and similar comments that show the inadequacy of Tabernacle’s virtual meetings.
At the February 27, meeting the clerk spent fifteen minutes trying to get all committee members audible at the same time. Later, background noise from an unrelated call was so loud and so persistent that it stopped the meeting.
Clerk Brown periodically reminds us that the township is saving money by using the free conference program she found. She’s right. We’re saving some pennies, but the quality of the meetings has been garbage.
Almost all other local governments, including Tabernacle’s Land Development Board, switched back to in-person meetings months ago. There’s no good reason for the committee to continue with virtual meetings exclusively.
I’ll admit it’s been convenient to attend meetings from my home office. And I’m sure that committee members enjoyed the convenience of being able to govern from their kitchen tables. But enough is enough.
Committee members Kim Brown, Noble McNaughton and William Sprague expressed their frustration with the technological snafus. They voted to return to in-person meetings as of March 27, 2023. Meetings will start at 6:30 PM at the fire house on Hawkin Road. Administrator-Clerk Maryalice Brown will have the building set up to accommodate the public meeting.
How the Vote Went Down
Initially, Deputy Mayor Hartman moved to resume live meetings in May. That vote failed two to three, with Mayor Moore joining Mr. Hartman. I can’t explain why live meetings in May would be acceptable but live meetings in March aren’t. Nor do I understand Mayor Moore’s vote. He said he was ok with live meetings in either month; but he voted against live meetings both times.
