Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Paterson council's effort to exit Garden State Growth Zone stalls amid legal disagreement
Summary
A proposed ordinance to remove Paterson from the state's Garden State Growth Zone and limit long-term tax abatements failed Tuesday after a split among council members and differing legal advice about whether a city vote was needed to end participation.
Councilman Michael Jackson brought a first-reading ordinance on Feb. 10 that would have ended Paterson's participation in the state'run Garden State Growth Zone, a program that allows tax abatements for qualifying redevelopment projects. Jackson said the city's prior local authorization expired in 2023 and that failing to reaffirm the policy had allowed automatic abatements on large projects that have contributed to recent appraisal spikes and higher residential tax bills.
"If the council does not have supportive legislation that continued this program, any abatement that was authorized after the date of 2023 is null and void," Jackson said, urging colleagues to act to prevent what he described as further shifts in tax burden to long-time residents.
Corporation Counsel responded that state statute had been extended and, in effect, superseded the earlier local timing issue. "The state statute extended it; it has been superseded," Corporation Counsel said, telling the council the state deadline for certificates of occupancy had been pushed forward and there was not an immediate opt-out mechanism described in the statute.
The exchange exposed a sharp split on the dais. Councilman Alex Mendez said many constituents are facing steep reassessments and that the council should pause to gather more financial data and legal analysis; he formally moved to table the ordinance so staff could prepare additional information. Several other members, including Councilwoman Ruby N. Cotton and Councilman Louis Velez, warned about losing grant and credit opportunities attached to the growth-zone designation.
After debate and an unsuccessful effort to obtain a second to Mendez's motion to table, the proposed ordinance failed for lack of a second. Council members agreed to continue the conversation in committee and to request a written legal opinion and fiscal impact analysis before returning the matter to the full council.
What happened next: council staff said they would provide a timeline of past actions, copies of state statutory language cited during the meeting and comparative examples from other municipalities. Jackson said he will continue to press the issue at workshops and in future votes.
Why it matters: the Garden State Growth Zone can change the tax treatment of redevelopment projects and affect how much revenue the city and school district collect. Residents at the meeting said newly announced reassessments on single-family homes have felt abrupt and unaffordable; council members asked staff for numbers showing how abatements and recent developer activity have altered comparable sales used for valuations.
Next steps: council members requested a written legal memo from Corporation Counsel, a fiscal analysis from the CFO, and additional hearings in committee; no new vote was scheduled at the Feb. 10 meeting.
