The former Merc property’s potential declaration as an area in need of redevelopment sparked considerable debate among the board members. There was a strong call for clarity and proper procedures moving forward. The board discussed at length the coordination required between the Planning Board and the borough Council during the study to determine the property’s eligibility for redevelopment. Members highlighted the need for their direct involvement in the study, expressing concerns about the prior decision-making process and the importance of the board’s role in maintaining oversight.

Commendations were issued for the planner’s conduct during the situation. The discussion reinforced the theme of the meeting: a desire for improved collaboration between the Planning Board and other governing entities to ensure the interests of the community are effectively served.

Further discussions revolved around the selection of a firm for the redevelopment project, with the process being called into question. A lack of communication between the Planning Board and the governing body was identified as a issue, particularly regarding the selection of professionals such as attorneys, planners, and engineers. Members expressed a desire for the board to have greater input in reviewing RFPs for these professionals, an area they felt had been lacking in previous years. The tax implications of the redevelopment project were also raised, emphasizing the necessity to expedite the process without compromising on quality or transparency.

Compounding the debates on transparency and process, a member brought to light concerns regarding a company’s failure to follow proper construction procedures for sidewalk construction. The potential for substandard work was a key worry, alongside confusion about the process for issuing RFPs for professional services versus direct contracting. This led to the board considering a special meeting to expedite a redevelopment study, acknowledging the urgency of the matter. A motion was passed to authorize the study, with a special meeting tentatively scheduled for April 29th to address the issue promptly.

Lastly, the meeting covered a port’s resubmission, which was found to comply with the board’s resolution, receiving positive remarks in relation to a board member’s efforts. Despite the many substantive issues discussed, the public comment portion was opened and closed without any speakers.