Jersey City—Redevelopment Chair Steve Lipski told onlookers at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency that the narrowed field selected from six competing developers would only be announced at a special meeting to be scheduled later time. The room was packed with residents who came expecting to hear the facilities committee’s selection of two finalists chosen from the six groups vying for the trophy project. Lipski told the disappointed crowd that the special meeting would be scheduled within 24 hours and would held within about a week after the announcement of the time. That meeting is to be held at 5pm on Monday the 22nd of September.

The selection process has seemingly grown more complex rather than simpler, and the resolution further away rather than closer, with each step toward finalizing the selection of the redeveloper to be designated. A developer, George Filopolous of Metrovest, had already been chosen, but not given final approval, pending a community hearing of Filopolous’ proposal for the reuse of the historic site covering nearly ten acres at the exact geographic center of the city.

At what was meant to be a solo presentation by Filopolous to the residents of the area, another developer, the Kushner Companies, made a completely unexpected appearance under vague and hazy circumstances outside normal channels and proceeded to make an impromptu presentation competing with Filopolous’. Kushner, who had turned down the project two years earlier, and has again withdrawn from the current competition.

But Kushner’s appearance threw open the gates to other developers to now compete for the suddenly desirable designation. In fact, the controversial Kushner was seen by some insiders as a stalking horse who never had any serious interest in the project and whose only purpose was to derail Filopolous. The JCRA invited other developers to an open competition trying to get the best possible deal and greatest benefit for area residents and the city as a whole.

Filopolous was understandably miffed, believing that he had a lock on the deal as no competitors had come forward until the final step in the approval process. Filopolous has soldiered on gamely and in gentlemanly fashion, following through with added requirements imposed after the fact. And after laying out several hundred thousand dollars in preliminary expense, and after he believed with good reason that he had a “done” deal, without a whimper.

Since the process has become far more elaborate than originally planned, interested developers have been required to prequalify with suitable financial statements showing wherewithal to take on a project of this magnitude and to post a non-refundable deposit of $5,000 earnest money. This yielded a field of six candidates. JCRA Suzanne Mack said that the selection criteria would be based on applicable past experience and track record in producing results in projects of comparable size and scope, and sufficient financial backing to come up with a few hundred million of financing.

Residents were generally impressed by “astounding scope and breadth of the proposals,” in the words of Valerie Vlahakis of the nearby McGinley Square Merchants Association. The range of uses in the six competing plans include everything from hotels, to convention center, performing arts center, green space, assisted living, office space, and retail space, not to mention condos and rental apartments, market rate and affordable.

The six developers who qualified then presented proposals at a design expo open to all interested parties over the previous weekend. Each group had a chance to pitch their version of the shape of things to come and attract support. Area residents have provided their reactions and input to the commissioners and the facilities committee. The facilities committee including Commissioners Rafael Diaz, Edward Santiago, Arthur Sigman and Executive Director Mack, will provide their advice and consent to the commissioners as a whole, incorporating the community input. Lipski forthrightly explained to residents at the meeting that the facilities committee advisory input to the commissioners would be just that: advisory and non-binding.

Also unexpectedly, some unfavorable information concerning one of the competing developers, the Chitrit Group began circulating just at the time the selection was to have been narrowed down. The previously published reports detail how that group acquired major existing properties in both Philadelphia and New York City. According to those reports Chitrit then began aggressively harassing and intimidating tenants while pushing previously affordable rents rapidly to market maximums as rapidly as possible and with a minimum of upgrade to the property.

Follow Ups:

• Re: JCRA TO NARROW MEDICAL CENTER DEVELOPER CHOICE AT SPECIAL MEETING mo money 13:08:29 09/19/03 (2)
  • What goes on here ? WeezilDeal 21:20:57 09/19/03 (1)
    • Re: What goes on here ? kitty kat 21:27:23 09/19/03 (0)