Update: This meeting is cancelled. The township clerk says on the morning of June 2, “Please note that there was an issue with the publication of this meeting for this evening and the meeting needs to be cancelled. The topic of 95 Linwood Ave. will be on the agenda of June 8.”
TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON—A special Township Council meeting to discuss estimated project costs for a new DPW or police facility at 95 Linwood Ave. was set for Thursday, June 2 at 7 p.m.
No meeting agenda was available at press time.
A possible decision on whether to follow through with the purchase — for which council, in a 4-1 vote, approved a $1.35 million bond ordinance in March — could occur at the meeting, as well as the disclosure of project cost estimates.
That’s according to Council President Desserie Morgan on May 25. She told Pascack Press that estimated costs for both projects would be discussed, along with the two due diligence reports that were prepared on the 1.5-acre property.
The reports include a land survey by Azzolina & Feury Engineering and an environmental site assessment by Lisko Environmental.
Morgan also revealed that she was unsure about spending township-bonded funds for either project given economic conditions. She said that on consideration she prefers to leave the DPW at the town hall site, and possibly add sound barriers to reduce noise for nearby residents.
She said she did not think that the police department should move to 95 Linwood Ave., noting “this is not the right time to start these types of projects” and that her decision would be based on the project costs and tax impact on residents.
She said she would “keep an open mind” and was “still trying to weigh the options” while noting “all roads lead back to ‘don’t want to spend the money.’”
Mayor Peter Calamari did not respond to our questions about the two due diligence reports’ availability, but he told us, “Costs will be available, and I do expect them to be discussed amongst both the public and the council.”
He added: “The current two options are the only ones being researched at this time. I will be happy to research others if the majority of the council can agree on additional ones.”
Late on May 25, Calamari released renderings and preliminary cost estimates for the two alternate plans on the Township website: Option 1 has the DPW at 95 Linwood Ave.; Option 2 has the DPW at Town Hall and police department at 95 Linwood Ave.
There is no option presented for a DPW at Town Hall and the police department at Town Hall, though that option was mentioned during the May 3 special meeting.
Option 1, Calamari revealed, requires bonding for a total of $5,216,615. The costs would include $1,350,000 for purchasing site; $4,866,615 to construct the DPW, minus $1 million from the school property sale years ago. That would cost the average homeowner over 30 years an average $86 more per year.
Option 2 costs include $1,350,000 for purchasing site; $5,850,000 for constructing a police facility at 95 Linwood; and $3,861,000 for constructing a new DPW at Town Hall.
Total new bonding required amounts to $10,061,000. The second option would cost the average homeowner $166 more per year over 30 years. The price difference is $4,844,385, or approximately $80 yearly over a 30-year bond.
Calamari said that residents’ concerns and comments, “caused the administration to come up with the second option.”
He noted that that alternative “does accelerate spending for a new police station that we were hoping to spread out over a few years. However, it is certainly worth considering at this time as these solutions, once implemented, will be in their respective locations for at least 50 years.”
Montessori school snubbed
The township approved a $1.35 million bond issue March 21 to purchase the property, after pushing aside a January purchase, backed by threat of property condemnation, by Apple Montessori Schools should the owner not accept the township’s offer.
Calamari said that previously the property owner only wanted to lease the site but then decided to sell, and while the township considered its next move, Apple Montessori moved in with a $1.3 million offer to purchase the site.
However, the township quickly moved to email the owner and place a similar bid, along with a threat of property condemnation under eminent domain, which under specific conditions allows government entities to take private property for public use at fair market value.
Township Attorney Ken Poller said the 60-day due diligence period on 95 Linwood Ave. for studies and investigations on the site expires on June 14, the date by which the township must decide whether to purchase the property or not.
At prior meetings, several residents, and even one Paramus council member, said the council should reconsider purchasing the property and instead let the Apple Montessori School build there and continue to receive about $35,000 in annual property tax revenue. It was unclear if their tax bill would be that high.
Residents and nearby Paramus homeowners had criticized the DPW proposal for increasing heavy truck traffic in an already congested area with nearby entry/exit ramps for Route 17 and the Garden State Parkway, plus noise, pollution, and vehicle accident risks.
On May 3, more residents supported a police department facility on site; however, the mayor provided no official cost estimates for either the DPW or police facility proposals. At the May 16 Township Council meeting, the mayor said he was still waiting for cost estimates from the architect, which he said he hoped to receive by week’s end.
However, Calamari strongly supports purchasing the property, noting the township lacks open space to build needed municipal facilities on, unlike nearby Paramus, which has more industrial zones that are available.
Poller did not respond to a Pascack Press email by press time requesting comment on the special meeting as well as our public records request to view the due diligence reports prepared on the site.
While both reports hold clues to the site’s past, the environmental assessment may be a deal breaker if it shows any extensive contamination that requires remediation.
Resident Bill McAuliffe, who initially raised the contamination concern, said some unofficial research he had done did not turn up any past remediation or tank removals done on the site.
The Lisko environmental site assessment report likely addresses whether any soil or groundwater contamination exists from a prior use as a gas station, apparently in the 1940s and 1950s as seen on archival photos shown by McAuliffe at a late April council meeting. The photos show two old-style gas pumps in front of the former Hoogland House on the site.
See also “Calamari rethinks DPW at Charlie Brown’s, now eyes police dept. move,” Pascack Press, May 9, 2022.