Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Redevelopment Nestle topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Freehold council tables redeveloper designation for former Nestle site after communication and capacity concerns
Summary
At its Oct. 6 meeting the Freehold Mayor and Council voted to table consent agenda item CR4, which would have designated a conditional redeveloper for the former Nestle property, after council members said Nestle had not communicated with the borough and Nestle's counsel said the proposed redeveloper lacked a contract and demonstrated financial capacity.
At its Oct. 6 meeting, the Freehold Mayor and Council voted to table consent agenda item CR4 — a conditional redeveloper designation for properties including Block 93, Lot 1.02/02 — after members said they had not been notified by Nestle or a prospective redeveloper and the borough’s redevelopment attorney advised postponement.
Council members voiced strong concern that the borough, which owns a majority of the land at the Nestle site, had been left out of conversations that other municipalities and outside parties apparently had. "They have not communicated with us at all," Council Member Margaret Rogers said, describing repeated outreach efforts that she said had gone unanswered. Several members said they feared a "side deal" with a neighboring township could undercut the borough's redevelopment goals.
Amanda Curley, who identified herself as an attorney with Dave Pitney representing Nestle, told the council the company was "surprised" to see the conditional-developer designation on the agenda and that Nestle had not received notice. Curley said the named prospective redeveloper "is not under contract, hasn't submitted an offer and has indicated he did not have the financial wherewithal to purchase the property." She left contact information and urged the borough to meet and coordinate with Nestle and the broker teams.
The council moved to table CR4 for one meeting on the recommendation of the borough’s redevelopment attorney; a roll-call vote recorded five votes in favor and one vote against tabling. The motion does not change the redevelopment plan but pauses formal designation while council and counsel seek more information and outreach to the parties involved.
Council members said the next steps are to have the borough’s redevelopment attorney follow up, secure clearer communication lines with Nestle and any prospective redevelopers, and return CR4 to the agenda at the next regular meeting. The council formally adopted the remainder of the consent agenda (items CR1, CR2, CR3, CR5 and CR6) during the same session.
The borough identified the affected parcel on the tax map during the meeting as Block 93, Lot 1.02/02; the council noted the item would return at the next meeting for further consideration.
