Cape May Planners Nix Redevelopment Zone

CAPE MAY – The overflow crowd that filled the auditorium at Cape May City Hall sensed victory Jan. 9 and began shouting “Vote,”  “Kill it now.” 
That happened as the planning board considered delaying a vote on the redevelopment zone proposal. The crowd, overwhelmingly opposed to the plan, sensed victory was within its grasp. 
Applause erupted as the proposal died with two affirmative votes.
Council Asks for Consideration
In October, with little discussion of its motives or objectives, Cape May City Council passed a resolution directing the planning board to evaluate Block 159 as a potential redevelopment zone. 
The block is bordered by Lafayette, Ocean, Washington and Franklin streets, and is home to the Washington Commons Shopping Center and most municipal government buildings.
Importantly, the block also hosts two key and five contributing buildings in Cape May’s inventory of historic structures.
A Determination of Need report by the board’s engineer Craig Hurless concluded that the block met the statutory requirements for a redevelopment zone with “dilapidated and obsolete” structures, abandoned storefronts, and depressed assessment values. 
Earlier in the day, Mayor Clarence Lear had attempted to defend the council’s unanimous decision to enter into the redevelopment zone process when he spoke before the Chamber of Commerce of Greater Cape May.
In that talk, he called for an exploration of the city’s options for development of that part of its core business district. 
The Meeting
Over 180 people filled the auditorium for the planning board meeting, taking all seats, lining the walls as standing areas and even using the balcony to hold an additional 30 persons.
The first hour of the meeting was taken up as Hurless read most of his 21-page report into the record. It ended with a recommendation that the planning board affirm that the block meets the requirements for a redevelopment zone and return a positive recommendation to the governing body.
The citizens were having none of it. One after another speaker criticized the need report, claiming that it was full of unsubstantiated conclusions and lacked evidence of blight on the block.
Former mayor Jerry Gaffney said reading the report made him think it was about a section of Camden.
Store owners with businesses in the Washington Commons Shopping Center rose to express angry reaction at statements that their buildings were “dilapidated and obsolete.”
Jules Rauch argued that the planning board sat as a jury charged with weighing the evidence presented in the report.
“These statements in the report must be proven not just stated,” Rauch said. Earlier in the day, Rauch had been in Florida, but he flew back to protest the redevelopment zone proposal in person.
Rauch warned that the board risked making a decision that would put the city on a watch list about its historic designation status.
He urged nothing be done without checking with appropriate federal and state authorities about the potential impact of such a decision.
Rauch concluded by putting on the table what many in the room thought: He spoke of private meetings between council members and local businessman Curtis Bashaw; of conceptual plans Bashaw submitted for development of the Washington Commons area; and of emails in August, months before the October resolution by council that sent the proposal to the Planning Board, which hinted at the potential need for redevelopment authority to support Bashaw’s plans.
“This is not an example of the transparency in government we have been promised,” Rauch said.
Robert Mullock, owner of the Chalfonte Hotel, rose to scold the board, shouting that this “process is not right.”
Ex-mayor Edward Mahaney spoke against the redevelopment zone designation warning of risks to the city’s historic landmark status and stating that the proposal went to the planning board without the level of public involvement it deserved.
Mahaney joined with others who criticized the “lack of evidence” for the need report’s assertions and conclusions. He said that the “proposed project is skewed unequally in Curtis Bashaw’s favor and to the detriment of the City of Cape May.”
Christine Miller, who early on championed opposition to the redevelopment proposal at council meetings, said, “You have legal reasons to reject this proposal,” adding that the board had heard no “substantial credible evidence” to support the designation of a redevelopment zone.
A Voice in Defense
Near the end of testimony, Anthony Monzo, former city solicitor, identified himself as attorney for Washington Commons LLC, a company controlled by Bashaw.
Monzo argued that the issue before the board was a narrow one, “Does the area meet the statutory requirements for a redevelopment zone?”
He urged the board to leave other matters related to the future development of the area to the city council.
Monzo said Bashaw’s desire was to engage in the kind of development that would forge a long-lasting relationship with the Acme, keeping it in Cape May.
Monzo’s comments were immediately attacked. Those opposed to the plan remarked that Bashaw has had years to upgrade the Acme and had done nothing.
Bernard Haas said this proposal is a “kettle of fish that will continue to stink for a long time.”
As the planning board voted, council representative Patricia Hendricks, who had supported the council vote to send the proposal to the planning board, explained her changed vote. 
“What has motivated many of you tonight is the question of what motivated council in October? There was no sinister plan,” she said. With that, she voted with the majority to reject the proposal.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.