It turned out that the Muhlenberg site Consultant’s report which
the Planning Board was to consider was a slightly modified version of the draft
presented at the August town meeting; with a change of the “housing component
to something called “veteran’s residence”. The Board was informed that a final
report would soon be available and forwarded to them.
Under the Chairman’s leadership the Board concurred that this
was premature for any consideration. It should be noted that it is not (whoops), as I
understand, the Planning Board’s function is to adopt and enforce the City’s master
plan. It can make changes in the zoning use designation, and can grant variances
to the zoning code. It cannot approve or reject proposed projects only as to
their compliance with the zoning code and conformity with the master plan..
The Consultant’s report about possible usage of the
Muhlenberg tract is not a project for development but a
concept that might cause the Board to make some zoning change which would open
up the possibility for a developer.
Since JFK is purportedly the owner of the property through
the Muhlenberg name, unless the city somehow obtained title; the city cannot
develop it. Nor can the city approve of any developer.
That does not mean that the city cannot seek and attempt to
aid a worthwhile developer interested in creating on the campus an acceptable
health care complex in obtaining the land from JFK. That will be difficult
because JFK may have placed an unrealistic price tag (17mil? rumor) on the site
to prevent such a project.
The game will continue to be played out without any citizen
input, most likely out of what may be felt to be necessity.
The Planning Board out of consideration of those who had come for this matter, elected to consider it out of turn before any of the other items on the agenda. That was greatly appreciated.
About Board and Commission agendas, would it not be a public service if they all were posted in advance on the City site in an easily accessible manner.
City should take the property under eminent domain and then get the redevelopment it wants.
ReplyDeleteMike, that has been suggested in previous blogs, but seems to be a route of last resort and not one that was politically acceptable in previous years.
ReplyDeleteAddendum: One of the immediate steps the City must take is a comprehensive title search on all of the segments of the site to determine if there are any restrictive deeds being ignored or even how legal is the JFK's ownership. If the Foundation owned any of the land for Plainfield health services; does JFK have a right to use or sell for other purposes. This may be money well spent and should take place without delay.
DeleteBased upon the legal eligibility criteria the Muhlenberg site would probably qualify to be an offically designated Area In Need of Redevelopment. This would be necessary to use eminent domain. However, the city would have to pay the owner just compensation for the land taking. This usually goes to court with dueling appraisals from both parties. The final ajudicated price is often an average of the two figures. Regardless the total cost would be in the MILLIONS for all of the related expenses.
ReplyDeleteWould in not be worth any extra costs to the city which could mean a tax increase over the life of bonds to regain needed health c are support? If the people do not think worth a sacrifice then Plainfield is doomed to be a dying slum.
DeleteEven if the city owned the property who would invest in developing a medical center of any scale? How would they recoup the investment from the billings to mostly Medicaid and Medicare patients?
DeletePlease, just once, show us the money. Show us how, in terms simple or complex, the financing and payback would work. Muhlenberg couldn't make it work nor could JFK. Show us how it can be done.
Show us the money.
Great question. There are circumstantial differences that could help answer. One is the ACA with the increased number in the insured population. Along with that group the changes in Medicaid eligibility. Although the charitable care loss will be minimal it is true that Medicaid payments are lower than insurance payments.
DeleteFor profit health care companies have a better control and knowledge over true operational costs than the traditional non-profits. Included in this is the outlandish compensation that most non-profit CEO’s and top assistants were receiving.
If the institutional atmosphere is attractive enough for patients such as single patient rooms (private) it will be the quality of the staff that can bring in area patients that did not wish to come to an urban hospital.
The Medical Mall with the new trend of salaried/contracted physicians will be composed of specialists and generalists that also staff the hospital thus creating a referral base. The hospital will be the recipient of all payments for professional services.
Of course it will take a few years to again create the nucleus of top notch docs that once staffed Muhlenberg.
It will take time to make it an economically viable operation since it will be starting from scratch and may need some subsidies from the target communities. Thus residents must be willing to pay some increase in taxes, so it will need selling.
With respect, this answer is not nearly good enough. It's not even a real answer to the question. It's not a plan, it's a dream. Without analysis using real dollar amounts it's meaningless. It's a disservice to the community by providing comfort without foundation.
ReplyDeleteWho can answer the question? Who can show us the money?
Are there any readers who are MBA's or finance pros who can tell us how it can be done? Are there any children of readers who are students at Rutgers B-school? Lawyers? Law students? How about MPHs? MPAs? Anyone have a LinkedIn contact? A Facebook friend?
Who can show us the money?
“Show us the money”; I made no claim that what I have replied to you was a plan nor was it a dream. I was a short space elicitation what may make a difference under present circumstances.
DeleteI have also made a suggestion in my July 2, 2014 blog about a needed step to reach the goal; the creation of a citizen’s task force. Of course feasibility studies must be done. If a commercial operation would be the developer, they will do it before submitting a proposition.
It would help if the city or the task force that I recommended could also do such a study but that is not essential. More important is to determine the true value of the property sans the hospital buildings. The ultimate cost will include the land acquisition by purchase or confiscation plus legal costs, as well as demolition of buildings that cannot be recycled.
Any new hospital facility will need a committed community willing to pay the taxes needed to finance the city’s responsibility. That will take education and persuasion.
I would have hoped that your genuine concerns would have given you the desire to be known not a shadow in the dark.