This summer the Home Groaners paid $7,500.00 to a lawyer to investigate ground rents in OG. Are the members being taken for a ride? Blogfinger photo. ©
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor @Blogfinger. Lately 2021, there has been renewed interest in our prior posts about ground rents. Why?
2016: Recently the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association got on their high horses to raise an alarm about the land leases which property owners pay yearly to the CMA. They claimed that this issue is of such importance that they hired a lawyer.
The Coaster, of Sept 29, reporting from the last HOA meeting, quotes Barbara Burns, HOA president, as saying that the ground rent issue is “critical” and that “it cannot be allowed to fester.” She also is quoted as saying that “more banks are refusing to issue mortgages on Ocean Grove properties due to this issue. “
But it wasn’t clear to us as to why the Home Groaners were being involved when, so far, they have failed to provide a single example of a residence in town that has been charged with an increased lease payment. We spoke to a senior realtor in town who knew of no such examples. We have heard of an Inn and of one condo owner who has had a problem.
This seemed to be a concern mostly for condo and commercial property owners. So why the HOA is getting so involved is unclear. Don’t they represent homeowners, or are they merely shills for the Township Committee, commercial interests and developers? Or maybe some of them are worried about their own checkbooks
Neptune Township Committeeman Randy Bishop, who owns a bed and breakfast in Ocean Grove, said in the August 3 edition of the Coaster that “the Township has a real reason to worry about any sizeable increase in the lease agreements.”
He said, “The $10.50 per lot lease was really a tradition, but the new lease increases raise the question does the OGCMA now have a more vested interest in the land. And, if that is the case, should the Township now be naming them on every violation and every lien process?
“Since three banks decided to no longer write mortgages in Ocean Grove, it causes instability, and the actions of the Camp Meeting Association continues to jeopardize homeowners’ values. Since the original leases make no mention of use, commercial or residential, it continues to have a negative impact on all properties in Ocean Grove,” Bishop said.
Bishop, who recently resigned from the Township Committee, seems to be thrashing about wildly with those threatening comments.
Today we received a policy statement from the CMA about this matter. It is posted below. Click on the letter to make the font larger.:
JESSI ALEXANDER sings about being wrong (If the shoe fits, wear it—and return the money to the members.)
Paul, just for everyone’s information Kearny Bank is making home equity loans, giving mortgages and is happy to continue serving old and new customers here in Ocean Grove and surrounding communities.
P.S. – has anyone actually received this letter in their mailbox as of yet???
Blogfinger: I’m glad if CMA COO John DiGiamberadino wants to improve transparency, but they have a long way to go.
Shelly: Neptune didn’t triple your taxes. The re-evaluation of our homes was done in every town in Monmouth County.
Who owns the land under our home?
When we bought our home, we received an “Assignment of Lease” The paper work filed “in the County Monmouth” called us “Tenants in Common.” We received “an indenture of lease” dating back to 1873 and made by “the Ocean grove Camp Meeting Association of the Methodist Episcopal Church”
The paper said that our lot was a “parcel of ground” which was “numbered” on the Map of Lots of Camp Ground of the Camp Meeting Association, and that the same lot could be found on the Neptune Township Official Tax Map. The Assignment of Lease was recorded in the County Clerk’s office in the Deed Book. The document was signed by he President of the CMA.
Of particular interest was a letter from the CMA President to us which said that the “assignment of leasehold on the subject property has been approved.” Here is the last paragraph in that letter:
“The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association owns all the land in Ocean Grove. The property you are purchasing is located on leased land. This land is leased out to you in a 99 year lease. When you purchase a home in the Grove, you own the home and lease the land it is on and you also agree to follow the rules and regulations set forth by the Association. The Lease indicates that each homeowner pays an annual ground rent charge. Your attorney can inform you of the amount you will be paying each year. The invoice is mailed out to you the end of January.”
So, who owns the land?
But I was not able to find a document providing the “terms and conditions of a ground lease” which might cause someone to be “in default.”
OhGee: The decision to declare the North End a “Zone in Need of Redevelopment” should have been challenged in the courts by the OGHOA. The designation should not have been approved by the Township. Such zones were intended for horrible blighted areas that were at risk for the health and welfare of a community and where no one would develop such locations.
Ocean Grove did not fall into such a category. In 2007 the designation was put forth not to rescue an endangered community, but as a sneaky way to help the CMA and WAVE developers get around the single family zoning at the North End. The HOA, instead of vigorously opposing the NERP, did the opposite and supported the project.
I never received any such letter of policy from the CMA.
The HOA had good reason to look into a potentially harmful and widespread problem when the B and B was subjected to a huge interest in ground rent (which ultimately had to be renegotiated). It’s a good idea to know the legal foundation of ground rent, which to me is an anachronism. Ocean Grove is no longer a selective theocracy, leasing property to a limited population. It seems likely that a land lease with annual rent would be consistent with a population of persons of the same religious interests. That is no longer the case.
We have no idea what the ground rent money is now used for. I would have no problem with contributing a modest and equitable annual amount to maintain areas that we all agree are common and shared. I am totally opposed to contributing to the Camp Meeting. This is no longer a theocracy, and homeowners and local businesses should not be forced to subsidize a religious organization.
I guess Mr. Bishop didn’t share the same concern when Neptune nearly tripled property taxes on some Grovers.
Who owns your lot?
At one time the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association owned all the land in O.G. Today, most residents believe they still do.
I believe: If that was true, then all the land in O.G. would be shown on the Tax Map and listed in the Tax Book as one (1) Lot; and the OGCMA would receive, from the Township, one (1) Tax Bill for all the taxable property in OG.
Then you would receive from the OGCMA, a notice of “ground rent due,” and that would include each renters fair share of the Tax Bill, and the “ground rents would be REASONABLE.
Conversely, I also believe if your lot is listed in the Tax Book, and the Township sends YOU a tax bill and you pay the Township directly, then you own the property, and not the OGCMA. In that case additional ‘”ground rent” without an explanation would be UNREASONABLE
A ’99 year lease in perpetuity is just a different kind of land ownership.
So, who owns your lot? Only the Courts could answer that question. In the meantime, as Dr. Carol reminds us, pay your ground rent on time.
I spoke to the new CMA COO John DiGiamberadino regarding this letter. He said that he wants to show more “transparency” in providing the public with information. The CMA has been having informational meetings with the leaders of various OG organizations since Sandy, but the reports of those meetings came from BF or, more recently, from OGU.
But when it comes to controversies, the CMA has tended to be close mouthed. So perhaps this letter will signal a change in policy. Paul @Blogfinger
When we bought our OG home a few years ago, we had to be very selective choosing the right Mortgage broker to help facilitate the Land Lease process, as the banks’ confusion can create a bit of a worry for the new prospective homeowner. We had originally used a family friend as our mortgage broker and they were not familiar with the OG land Lease. We then chose to work with a seasoned broker who had assisted in many OG mortgages. There was no issues. The key is to use the right mortgage broker who is familiar with the OG Land Lease.
The Camp Meeting needs to learn the meaning of the word “transparent.”
Dr. Carol: I didn’t get my ground rent notice for 2016 until August! Go figure. Not sure why the OGCMA doesn’t send out the Ground Rent notices ahead of time, for example November 1st for 2017 Ground Rents due.
Paul: Legal fees fighting the North End project would cost the OGHOA a lot more than $7,500. At this point, many years later, simple items like EPA approvals were never obtained. The supposed tests run to prove that WAVE could build a partially underground parking garage, have never been made public. Personally, I suspect because they don’t exist!
Until OGCMA and WAVE seriously get their act together, which doesn’t look like anytime soon, the North End lot will remain as-is. So no point filing a lawsuit at this time. If a North-end court battle ever becomes a reality, I’m sure the illegal zoning will be brought up as an argument in litigation.
Concerned Citizen: To differentiate between condo owners and house owners is a mistake. They are both considered residential properties—- homeowner vs. homeowner.
Residential houses effected so far by significant ground rent increases include the Jack Green housing project on Cookman and Clark; also ANY single house, new or completely rebuilt, pays a lot more than $10.50. Like the newer condos, the ground rent amount varies greatly, from a few hundred to almost a thousand dollars per year.
The OGCMA does not advertise this fact, and neither do the realtors trying to sell newly built homes in OG. If the OGCMA opened their ground rent books to the public (which, of course, they won’t) the seemingly arbitrary and diverse dollar amounts would surprise many.
OhGee: It is curious that the HOA quickly hired a lawyer for this ground rent issue when they have not dipped into their legal fund or raised money for legal advice regarding the disgraceful zoning changes which the Township has approved for the North End project, for illegal condos that have been permitted without parking, for violations of state Land Use law regarding parking (RSIS), and other questionable zoning decisions such as Mary’s Place and the Warrington. That is where the time bomb has been planted which can eventually, or even now, affect our property values and quality of life.
And why does the Carriage House or any condo owners association that has been affected need money on their behalf from the HOA? Why is this legal issue in particular something that we the people need to pay for, especially since most of us are not affected now?
Are there any conflicts of interest at the Home Groaners Association? And, have they paid any additional legal fees since they “lawyered up.” I used to routinely make a contribution to that legal fund, but no more.
First of all the OGHOA general membership did not vote to spend this money on an attorney; it was decided on by the OGHOA board. The board makes all the decisions and controls everything, not the members. What does that say about the OGHOA? I think they over reacted to this whole ground issue.
I would like to know what banks will no longer provide mortgages and how many residential houses were effected by ground rent increases—-not commercial properties and not condos
If the Camp Meeting or the OGHOA can answer these questions, that would be great so the public can know, Can someone with good information that is credible provide us with this information please Thanks.
Don’t blame the OG Homeowner’s Association. The OGCMA started this drama. You can’t cause a ruckus at a B&B sale closing by jacking the new owner’s ground rent to $5k without it alarming both business owners and homeowners.
And I’m glad OGHOA got legal advice/counsel! For a few years now, the OGCMA has quietly increased the ground rent at the newer condo developments in town. Just ask any owner at the Ocean Pathway condos. Same thing at the condos at Main and Lawrence Ave. And, whether we like condos or not, they are considered homeowners and have every right to be represented by the OGHOA! As a homeowner I expected the OGHOA to become involved.
The OGCMA,’s actions towards the Carriage Inn B & B caused a snowball effect of concerns raised across town – how could they NOT think Grovers would be upset? If anything, groups in town lawyering-up sent a clear message that business and home owners were not going to lay down and; accept what occurred to the Carriage B&B. And neither is the Carriage B & B themselves – their lawyer is currently renegotiating their ridiculous ground rent.
After months of public radio silence, the OGCMA sends out this letter, making it sound like they were never even considering raising ground rent. How stupid do they think we are?
This is just another example of life in the OGCMA fishbowl & how they view the property owners & residents of this town as a nuisance. Which breeds contempt. OGCMA reaps what they sow.
Many of us did not get ground rent bills in a timely fashion this year — instead, we received notices in the spring that our rent had been due Jan 1 and was now overdue. So does that make us “in default” and subject to increased ground rent? Be careful folks — make sure you pay your ground rent by Jan 1 whether or not you get a bill.
One wonders if Ocean Grove had stuck with the original master plan and replaced open lots with single family homes instead of cramming as much density as possible on those lots with condos, this issue just might be moot. A benefit might have been fewer parking issues as well.
While I appreciate the OGCMA’s alleviation of worry for purely residential leases, this letter does not address the commercial/business district of OG and as stated, condo owners. This is a serious issue for everyone in the Grove. You’ve spoken to a senior realtor? Me too. In fact, more than one.
When you have banks who refuse loans because they cannot validate the amount of the annual rent on 99 year perpetual leases, there is a problem. This problem remains for the owners listed above. How about the B and B Carriage house owners who lost $45,000 on their sale due to the OGCMA and their inability to be transparent about this issue months ago? Do you think they received the letter as well as a check for damages sustained (45k loss?)
Do you think if the OGCMA started to act as a true landlord instead of adhering to representative leases and collecting increased fees, they would be open to increased responsibility and liability to their tenants?
But God bless Randy Bishop, who has had the decency to step up and protect the rights of all the citizens here by pointing out that there was no zoning when these leases were written so there is no distinction in the use of the property, therefore there should be no distinction in the collection of the lease fees.
Further, the OGCMA letter references that they would adhere to the leases as long as there was no default. What constitutes default? Failure to adhere to OGCMA guidelines or rental payments?
Grovers should have united on the ground rent issue to preserve our economic structure and help our neighbors. The OGHOA was attempting to do a good thing, as was the Township. Hard to find fault with that, and the OGCMA owes our fellow citizens the same assurance.
Addressing “Dear Friends and Neighbors” and this missive, continues to illustrate the “landlord” (Camp Meeting Association) continues to misunderstand its community-responsive role.
Who received this “reassuring” letter ? I didn’t as a long time homeowner. I am grateful to Blogfinger for publicizing it.
While it relates to “original” residential property, it provides no relief to condo owners with inordinately high yearly increasing ground rentals. Its absence of consideration for those homeowners, only reaffirms its continue greedy approach to supporting the construction of and conversion into condos.