Will the CMA someday charge ground rent for this? New Yorker.
By Paul Goldfinger, Editor Blogfinger.neT
It is rare for lawyers to go public in the media, particularly in the Coaster or in Blogfinger. I find that lawyers don’t like to put their opinions into writing to be viewed by the public. I have had some attorneys contact me privately about Ocean Grove matters, but they never want to be quoted.
That is one reason I was particularly interested in what OG lawyer James T. Hundley had to say about the current ground rent controversy. He wrote a Letter to the Editor to the Coaster in the Nov. 24 edition. And in that letter he made some impressive points explaining and clarifying what is going on.
In his internet ads, his law firm is described as “specializing in the unique needs of buying, selling and renovating homes and condominiums in the Grove.”
In addition he has represented a pair of OG condominium associations (2018) in a suit against the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, and that suit was about ground rents. (The condoricans lost.) Here is a link to that suit:
https://law.justia.com/cases/new-jersey/appellate-division-unpublished/2018/a3842-16.html
The latest on that ground rent front is that the CMA is defending its desire to change the rules regarding ground leases. Our recent articles report that a group (“Save Our Values”) has formed to challenge the CMA. (see our link below.)
Here is a link to our latest post on this topic: https://wp.me/pqmj2-Lxl
Hundley doesn’t say if he is a member of that group.
In his letter, he says that the CMA plan “will have a negative impact on all Ocean Grove properties: commercial and residential properties alike.”
It would be best if our readers can see the entire letter because it is an eye opener. Read the Blogfinger editorial comments below that.:
Coaster Nov. 24, 2021Editor’s note:
This letter provides some information that has been missing until now. But we have a couple of concerns:
a. At the end Mr. Hundley says that if commercial property tax revenue falls in OG, then Neptune will “recoup by increasing Ocean Grove residential property taxes.”
That doesn’t sound right. OG homeowners would not be solely responsible for falling assessments of commercial properties in the Grove. I imagine that all Neptune property owners would have to pick up the slack. OG is not a unique tax district.
b. Hundley says that “ground leases with fixed annual rents were never intended as means to generate income.”
But, in the book the Story of Ocean Grove 1869-1919 by Morris S. Daniels, on page 265-267 there is a discussion of ground rents being used for a variety of purposes to help the public such as garbage collection, street lighting, and policing. The discussion spells out the practical uses of the ground rents and documents changing fees, starting at $2.50 and going up subsequently as needed. finally landing at $10.50.
DIXIELAND RAMBLERS:
The courts ruled in 1930 that the OG leaseholds were held in perpetuity. In other worlds they cannot change. The leasehold, under contract law can only be used as single unit uses. The MLUL further restricts any lot 30′ by 60′ with a OGCMA lease to a single family use because they are non-conforming lots that fail to meet the minimum lot size required for a single family use. This therefore prohibits any 99 year leasehold to any other greater intensity use.
Neptune is mandated by law to zone each and every lot in OG to a single family use within its bounds. The courts understand that it would then create a certain number of nonconforming uses, but the courts still require single family zoning for OG.
The OGCMA has no zoning powers no matter how they write their leases. Zoning power is only through the courts using planning boards and boards of adjustment.
Still, those two boards are only permitted through the courts to permit single family uses in OG.
Any other action by Neptune and its boards is done through fraud and criminal actions.
Kevin Chambers